Press Council reprimands 20 Minuten and Blick

The first case deals with Blick's coverage of a tragic traffic accident ("Zebrastreifen-Drama von Worb") in which a 10-year-old boy died in November 2011. Blick reported that investigators were convinced that a 70-year-old pensioner ("Der Unfall-Rentner") with two per mille alcohol in his blood had killed the child through negligent behavior in after-work traffic. "The drunk" had then committed a hit-and-run, but had been confronted by police shortly afterwards ("The damage to his car gives him away").

A few weeks later, Blick reported that the former president of the Employees' and Pensioners' Party had been arrested in connection with the accident in question ("Ex-politician arrested"). Blick also wrote that the accused had already served time in prison for fraud and published a photo censored with a black bar.

In March 2012, the defendant complained to the Press Council that the Blick reports violated clauses 3 (hearing of serious allegations) and 7 (privacy/identification) of the "Declaration of the Duties and Rights of Journalists". Among other things, the Blick reporters allegedly entered the rental property several times, rang the doorbells of roommates, and harassed his 89-year-old mother. The listing of his previous convictions also did nothing to clarify the traffic accident. The picture had been published without his consent and there had never been any reason to mention his first name and the first letter of his last name. Furthermore, he had never been questioned about the serious allegations.

The Press Council has now come to the conclusion that the complaint is partially upheld and that there has been a violation of Section 7. Although the accident was of public interest, it did not justify identifying coverage. The defendant had been a person of public interest - if at all - only 15 years ago. Although the full name was not mentioned, the person was recognizable beyond his or her immediate circle.

The Press Council dismissed the other accusations, even though the "harassment" of the 89-year-old mother was "borderline."

More information: http://www.presserat.ch/_46_2012.htm

Complaint against 20 Minuten and 20 Minuten Online

In the second case, a complaint was filed against 20 Minuten and 20 Minuten Online. Under the title "The noble whore who takes what she wants", 20 Minuten Online reported in February 2012 on the conviction of a prostitute for deprivation of liberty and fraud. She allegedly terroized a banker and locked him up in his apartment several times. However, the woman had been acquitted of the charge of sexual assault ("The first time, she allegedly even forced him to have sexual intercourse against his will").

The next day, the print edition of 20 Minuten stated that the "high-class prostitute" had not forced the "CS executive" to have sex. However, she had been convicted of IV fraud and other offenses. One of the pictures showed the Facebook profile photo in which the accused was wearing a mask. The woman then complained to the Press Council: many acquaintances would have recognized her through the Facebook picture. The invasion of her privacy had violated her personality. In addition, she felt violated by the title "The noble whore who takes what she wants" and the publication of intimate details such as her borderline disorder or her professional activity as a prostitute.

Tamedia's legal department admitted at the end of March 2012 that the anonymization of the woman had been insufficient. It had been assumed that the mask would make her identification impossible - instead, the complainant had been able to be individualized for a wide circle of people precisely because of the mask. 20 Minuten had not intended to violate the woman's privacy and had therefore immediately removed the article from the online archive.

The Press Council has now confirmed that the publication of the Facebook photo violates Clause 7 (Identification) of the "Declaration of the Duties and Rights of Journalists". The admission of the error by the 20 Minuten print editorial team does not change this fact. The Press Council rejects all other complaints, saying that the reports by 20 Minuten and 20 Minuten Online had not already violated personality by reporting truthfully and in a proportionate manner about the court hearing, even if they also addressed private and personal matters in the process.

More information: http://www.presserat.ch/_47_2012.htm
 
Teaser image: Screenshot Blick.ch