Press Council: Blick has violated privacy
The Press Council has partially upheld a complaint against *Blick*. The newspaper revealed the identity of a soccer player who was in pretrial detention in connection with the betting scandal. According to Blick, the information came from the individual’s Facebook page. The Press Council rejected the allegation of unethical reporting but criticized Blick for violating the individual’s privacy by publishing a photo.
With the headline "He was the Swiss branch manager of the betting mafia", the tabloid reported on a young footballer in February 2010. He protested against the violation of his privacy and the undercover research carried out by the authors of the report. Blick had gained unauthorized access to his Facebook page and had taken and published both a picture and information there.
According to the Press Council's decision, it is not clear whether the newspaper actually obtained the information thanks to covert Facebook friend requests. However, it considers privacy to have been violated. In addition to a rudimentarily distorted facial portrait (only the eye area is covered with a narrow strip), the article contains too much information about the protagonist that makes him recognizable beyond his immediate social environment. Communication in a social network such as Facebook, even if it is partly publicly visible, is generally used for the exchange of images and information between private individuals and less for communication with the public. Based on the Facebook entries alone, it could therefore not be assumed that the person concerned had wanted to make his involvement in the football betting scandal known to the public via Blick. Especially as he told the editorial team through his lawyer before publication that he did not want his name mentioned or his picture published.
According to the Press Council's decision, it is not clear whether the newspaper actually obtained the information thanks to covert Facebook friend requests. However, it considers privacy to have been violated. In addition to a rudimentarily distorted facial portrait (only the eye area is covered with a narrow strip), the article contains too much information about the protagonist that makes him recognizable beyond his immediate social environment. Communication in a social network such as Facebook, even if it is partly publicly visible, is generally used for the exchange of images and information between private individuals and less for communication with the public. Based on the Facebook entries alone, it could therefore not be assumed that the person concerned had wanted to make his involvement in the football betting scandal known to the public via Blick. Especially as he told the editorial team through his lawyer before publication that he did not want his name mentioned or his picture published.
