Article 10 - An Opportunity to Ensure Ethical Press Practice?

The UK press has immense power both to ensure open justice and to bring about justice through investigative journalism (see ITV’s The Hack). However, the press is notorious for causing harm through vilifying people and intruding into their private lives for commercial gain (see NGN’s recent apology to the Duke of Sussex). Often, litigation of these matters involves Articles 8 and 10 ECHR, balancing respect for the complainant’s private life with journalistic freedom of expression.
This paper will analyse the utility of tilting the balance in favour of Article 8 where unethical press practice has been shown (see the phone hacking scandal, Richard v BBC). This could better protect vulnerable individuals who have suffered harm due to press practice, particularly as the current primary press regulator lacks incentive and ability to ensure ethical standards (Coe, 2023).
The underlying justifications behind freedom of expression will be assessed through a lens of ensuring social justice, considering the social utility of newspapers and journalists benefiting from Article 10 by enabling information and ideas to be communicated and debated, balancing this with the social injustice that the press exacerbates, reflecting on the modern context of legislating against harmful content. Article 10 could be used to hold the press more accountable and achieve meaningful change in press practice.
To conclude, the paper will suggest that qualifying Article 10 could have chilling effects on press freedom particularly via state interference, though the effects of this are often overstated, and may be justifiable to ensure ethical practice.