Lawlor reportage - Muzzling of media must be avoided

FOLLOWING the death of disgraced politician Liam Lawlor fundamental questions have been left hanging over two major issues — the coverage by certain Sunday newspapers of the fatal accident in Moscow coupled with mounting concerns that his absence might affect ongoing tribunal investigations into bribery of politicians by developers.

From a media viewpoint there can be no denying that key aspects of reportage surrounding the ex-Fianna Fáil TD’s death were utterly indefensible.

Lending weight to this standpoint, senior Independent Newspaper executives have apologised to the Lawlor family, admitting the Sunday Independent story suggesting that a woman passenger in the car was a prostitute was inaccurate. The woman injured in the crash was a legal secretary and interpreter.

Notwithstanding Liam Lawlor’s tainted image as a politician, his family has every right to complain of that paper’s reckless reporting of the circumstances surrounding his death. There can no justification for publishing inaccurate reports based on the word of an anonymous police source without having established the facts.

There is every reason to fear this kind of reportage could come back to haunt the media generally by undermining public confidence in its modus operandi.

Amid continuing debate on the media’s role, the issue of ethics assumes paramount importance. It would be unacceptable for editorial policies to be based on the flawed principle that the facts should not be allowed get in the way of a good story.

Above all, this controversy has highlighted the question of establishing a press council which could clamp down on the worst excesses of irresponsible reporting. The Irish Examiner has long supported the establishment of a press council provided its members were not appointed by the government of the day.

Circulation wars among newspapers cannot be based on a publish-and-be-damned principle or, more accurately, lack of principle. Described by the Taoiseach as a “race to the bottom”, Sunday newspaper reports of Mr Lawlor’s death have also prompted Justice Minister Michael McDowell to declare that a press council would be set up before Christmas.

Despite renewed calls for stringent privacy laws, it would be ill-advised of Government to use the Lawlor incident as a pretext for introducing draconian legislation. If such laws prevailed here, corruption in political circles, sexual scandals involving the clergy, business scandals involving the banks and a raft of other issues of public interest might never have come to light. It is imperative that the public’s right to know continues to be protected in our democracy.

Although the tabloid mentality is fuelling demands for the introduction of stronger privacy laws in Britain, comparisons between the Irish and British media are unsustainable because, generally speaking, newspapers, radio and television here adopt a more understanding and responsible attitude towards the private lives of public figures.

Despite suggestions that the Mahon Tribunal would be akin to Hamlet without the prince, it would be a grave error to abandon a process which has helped uncover the bribery of politicians by developers in the Dublin land rezoning scandal.

Ironically, the absence of Mr Lawlor could accelerate tribunal investigations which have been repeatedly bogged down by his prevarication and blatant lying, thus adding enormously to the bill facing taxpayers.

It would be deplorable if the dog-eat-dog culture inculcated in some organisations were to provide Government with an excuse to introduce repressive legislation aimed at muzzling the media.