The recent press revelations concerning MPs and their expenses may have shifted public opinion somewhat in favour of journalists, vindicating their sometime role as custodians of the Truth. However, the News of the World phone hacking scandal, revealed in the Guardian recently, has brought into sharp focus the issue of what happens when the whistle is blown on those who are supposed to be blowing the whistle in the first place. We already know that this is not the first time that allegations of obtaining information illegally have been levied against the Sunday tabloid involved (reporter Clive Goodman was jailed in January 2007 for precisely this reason), but the wider question raised is how can the public at large be expected to have faith in organisations when the transparency of their own activities is being challenged?
Compare this, then, with the activities of some campaigning organisations and their own transparency credentials. In our recent blog posting “Charity begins at home” we discussed the inherent pitfalls which can present themselves when one is in the business of attempting to expose others for being less than honest or credible about the way in which they conduct their business. This would suggest that publications such as the News of the World, and indeed the Guardian who exposed the story, should be careful to ensure that their own credentials are water-tight, before attempting to lambast others for the same.
