Re: Sex headlines.
 

There are lots of things we would never include on police request. Things which could provoke crime that never appear in the papers. Local reports can't afford to get on the wrong side of them too often else they lose crime stories.

But on stories like this, police can only ultimately give guidance - which we ask for in advance - and then it is down to us reporters to pass on such guidance to the editor, who makes a judgement call and lives by it.

You may not think it, but in my experience, newspaper editors are much more knowledgable on the law regarding what a paper can and cannot say about subjects.

e.g. officers are quite happy to give details of incidents even after offenders have been charged and sometimes question why we don't use them.

The reality is that, in this situation, if we did use those details, we'd be guilty of contempt of court because revealing incident details could prejudice resulting court cases.

Re: Sex headlines.
 

Thank you Vitty.

Interesting point that it was Councillor Shiel who came across the dogging information on the internet, regarding this non story.

Also interesting how the Editor went against police advice, and did publish nearly every salacious detail from the web site, such as people leaving video tapes under rocks, and the day that a couple went there to be watched.

Your comment about how you are glad your story caused so much debate, and how we all bought the paper is a little worrying. Are we to expect more sensationalist headlined stories in the Observer with no real evidence to back them up?

If I was to write on this web site that today I saw two ducks mating on the lodge at Foxhill Nature Reserve, could we expect to see the headline in next week's Observer-

'VOYEUR IN ANIMAL SEX STORM IN OSWALDTWISTLE'?

Re: Sex headlines.
 

haha more civic pride , I like it.
I was going to point out the romours in my first post but thought better of it, but yes the whole area accy, rawtenstall, bacup, is apparently supposed to have the highest percentage of swingers doggers in the uk.

Vity, do you really think that this piece of land has/is used for dogging? Has any resident actually confirmed that they've saw this happen ?
And if so could they tell us were the best vantage point is.

Re: Sex headlines.
 

Yes it was at your discretion, and yes it was legal, but hardly fair on the local residents who are trying to get rid of fly tippers and just want a quiet life. You've just nationally advertised a piece of land as the main dogging site in the north west.

Re: Sex headlines.
 

I didn't say that it wouldn't. I didn't make a point for you to agree or disagree with. I was merely pointing out the way that some people use the media as a tactic to get things done. It's not a tactic I particularly like but it is a fact that going to the papers is a threat and a last resort if an issue is not resolved.

However, I do agree with your comments that it will, in this instance, probably make things worse.

Re: Sex headlines.
 

Having now read this story all I can say is its tardy, misleading and blatantly treats the residents of Hyndburn with utter contempt.

You took a story that you knew to be factually dated and inaccurate and opened the door to these sensation seekers all over again. When the police give guidance it’s usually based on known principles, i.e. don’t advertise something you want to avoid, these doggers may well now believe that it’s game on.

Innocent people wishing to walk up there may be caused undue concern and even feel excluded from a public area because of the fear and distaste that this form of reporting as brought them. All shorts of dross will be creeping round intimidated innocent people with the suggestion that they might wish to participate in a bit of woof.

Humour apart, this will also be seen by local pervs as an opportunity to thrill seek in an area the time had put behind it……I hope no one gets hurt or assaulted up there because you and your editor chose to expose the people of Hyndburn to this smut and promote an out dated set of directions back to this area.

Re: Sex headlines.
 

The whole story is based on one anonymous posting on an adult site. There is not one bit of evidence that anything sordid has even taken place, yet it merits a front page story, and goes against police advice. Disgraceful.

Re: Sex headlines.
 

So I take it you wont miss him when he leaves then.

Re: Sex headlines.
 

No, according to Vitty it was Councillor Shiel who found the information on the adult site, and the Editor who got Vitty to publish salacious details, going against police advice, all to sell papers.

Oh for the days when the Observer wasn't in tabloid form, and didn't stoop to tabloid tactics to sell copies, but relied on good journalism and real stories.

Re: Sex headlines.
 

Gayle, this form of Journalism is nothing more than distasteful sensationalism that won’t serve any purpose than shame local residents, draw the attention of idiots, perverts and unfortunately inquisitive children into the area, normally in these case’s its usually the latter that are feed upon by those we try to keep away from the innocent and vulnerable.

If this is seen as a legitimate means to an end then I would seek the resignations of those responsible and an immediate apology to the people of Hyndburn…..

Please note, had these incident had happened in the last couple of weeks and harm had been caused then it may have been News.

Re: Sex headlines.
 

It’s not personal; I think two people have made an error of Judgement in the manner in which they have reported this matter.

I would have expected half a column in the middle of the paper with a foot note expressing that this was an old story that might interest those seeking to have a gate fitted to prevent the area going to the dogs (Someone had to say it). The Councillor isn’t out of the woofs either.

As I said, it’s not personal Vitty, but perhaps sometimes its better to admit an error and make adjustments.

Re: Sex headlines.
 

Re: Sex headlines.
 

okay, I'll address the last comment first and move backwards.

Doug: The story is 100 per cent factually correct. Tell me what is inaccurate.

Councillor Shiel mentioned that he'd heard of the existence of such a website...he never gave the impression he'd seen it. I found it directly.

How have we made an error of judgement? As I've said before: the contentof the story is the end responsibility of the editor and I know what he is likely to allow to be in and what he is likely to exclude on the grounds of taste or ambiguity.

How is it an 'old' story? The councillor was asking this week 'where are the gates?' The council said this week the gates will be up in the next few weeks.

Whether the story is distateful or not is your opinion. The fact that it is going on at all may be interprted by some as distasteful. Again, how the editor chooses to present it is up to him.

If we presentented accurate information sensatiionally - great. We're paid to make articles as readable as possible.

With regards to the purpose that it serves:The article has arguably helped speed up the amount of time it will take to get the gate to keep out all but those who have keys.

How is it shaming local residents?

Who would you like to apologise and what for? We work to the Press Complaints Commission code of conduct. Tell me what rule we have broken in it and I'll personally apologise to you, Doug :)


Garinda - the Observer may be in tabloid form, but we are not in the same ilk as the daily nationals. We consider ourselves a family newspaper. The Sun doesn't have Junior League etc.

I agree with the rest of what you said in your most recent post (but again, it's all in the editor's hands) apart from the bit about "all to sell papers". Our main aim is to write stories to inform, entertain and present things that are in the public interest. You don't sell papers otherwise.

Garinda - as for your first post. with all due respect, how do you know what the story is based on "one anonymous posting?"

At the start of last year residents attended Huncoat Are Council to complain about this going on, we quoted it at the time.

They then went back to the area council to try to get a gate. Another resident then told Lancashire County Council about the problem in October...again we quoted them.

Councillors, council workers and residents have all gone in the record in the past about sexual activity going on on the site. I spoke one resident yesterday morning who said his children and grandchildren were having to walk/drive past couples in cars to get to home to his farm.

Yes it does merit a front-page story - look how much reaction we've had. It's the talk of the town. Sex always is.

Madhatter - those residents will get their gate to block off the track...that's what they've been ask for for 12 months. Yes, I do think this land is used for dogging.

Re: Sex headlines.
 

I was surprised on looking at the website HUNCOAT DOGGING to find a link through a member back to Accy Web.

Re: Sex headlines.
 

Please remember this is a family site and there are young children on here reading this thankyou.