Does anyone really think this is “in the public interest”? (One Direction)

[TeenLifeMum]

I can’t believe how many news articles with photos of the one direction guys saying “first picture since Liam’s death”. It makes me angry. It’s such an intrusion into a time of grief and feels so wrong. Who is reading these stories?

Just enough already

Is anyone arguing it's in the public interest? Are most celebrity stories in the public interest?

I mean, I agree with you it's unnecessary. But I don't think anyone's arguing some important public interest reason. No one is pretending it's anything other than nosiness.

It's that old public interest / of interest to the public thing isn't it.

The public are (in large numbers) interested. It is of relatively little importance. It preceded news about Russia dragging N Korean troops into Putin's war on BBC tonight.

“In the public interest” and “intrusion of grief” are in the editor’s code. There’s always been the gutter press but this is another level. The journalism breaches the code (imo). In the public interest doesn’t mean people are nosey and want to see it, it means the public have a reason to know and it is important the media informs them. (I’m an ex journalist.)

if celebs want to come and speak out, fine. If those closest to the deceased are walking in the street, that’s an intrusion of grief and not okay according to the editor’s code.

Agreed, it's utterly vile and predatory.

I will never forget the feeling of the press taking pictures of me as I walked to my friends funeral aged 20. It was revoltingly intrusive and unnecessary.

They can report on the story without taking photos of people who are still processing the news

It happens everytime someone dies who was in the limelight. I don't think the media think many people actually care, but it gets clicks or hits when people search for the person who has died. It is wildly invasive and I also find the 'so and so is sad that x has died' really weird as invariably even if they're not arsed they're going to say a generic statement aren't they.

I seem to have avoided nearly all of it but I did go past some hotel imagery and it struck me that so much had been released to the public

Its the world we live in and it wont change. Deal with it.

There is a DM article titled "The seven-year old who will inherit Liam Payne's vast fortune: Incredible sum he left Bear revealed by Nasty McNasty". It's not even been 72 hours. Also the headline - "the seven-year old who" - sounds like it is pretty focussed on the child which is beyond unpleasant.

There was a picture of Liam's dad visiting the hotel where he died and fans were trying to block photographers from taking pictures of him. The BBC had a picture of it so I guess they're just as bad.

The public interest argument doesn't work with intrusive images like you've mentioned. The argument is more to do with...when you restrict reporting, or limit it for a variety of reasons, they you're in country without a free press. And that's dangerous as the public doesn't know what's really going on. So it's not necessarily that the 'public is interested' in seeing intrusive photos. It's that intrusive photos are the dark side of living in a country with a free press - in the interest of the public.

The whole thing has been awful, can't believe how much air time it's been given, such mawkish, ghoulish behavior. I don't mean that I don't care but fhs. Who'd be famous ??

As usual, the coverage is excessive with all sorts coming out to get in on the act.