Information Commissioner denies data protection laws would ‘shackle’ media
The proposed code was criticised by the editors of three national newspapers.
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The Information Commissioner has denied his office’s proposed data protection and journalism code of practice would “shackle” the media after it faced criticism from a group of British newspaper editors.
John Edwards said there is nothing in the code constituting “a limit on the freedom of the press” and claimed it is “misdirected and disingenuous” to criticise it while it is still in the review stage.
It comes after editors from the Daily Telegraph, The Times and Mail Newspapers called on the Government to use its proposed Bill of Rights to exempt the UK’s media from the law.f
It is misdirected and disingenuous to criticise a draft code that is still under review, as part of our detailed and thorough consultation process
In a letter to Culture Secretary Michelle Donelan and Justice Secretary Dominic Raab they argued the proposed code, written by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), would leave journalism open to “expensive and time consuming” legal challenges.
They added it would also turn the ICO into a statutory regulator of the media.
Mr Edwards said in a blog on the ICO website: “The letter sent to Government by three national newspaper editors last week suggested that this code will in some way ‘shackle’ the media. That is far from the case.
“Our codes do not create new law, but simply explain what is required under the existing law – indeed, similar codes already exist around protecting children’s data online or sharing data.
“There is nothing in our code that constitutes a limit on the freedom of the press.
“It is misdirected and disingenuous to criticise a draft code that is still under review, as part of our detailed and thorough consultation process.
“We have been speaking with journalists and those in the media throughout, to understand how data is used, and how the law might apply to them.
“The latest draft of the code reflects a great deal of what we’ve heard from the media across our consultation.”
Mr Edwards said the ICO would continue to work with the media “to ensure we produce a clear and practical code”.
He added: “Where the media would like to be exempted from the law entirely, they must take their case to the Government.
“But until that point, it will remain that a free press is an essential function of our democracy, but so is the ability for a regulator to carry out the will of Parliament.”
According to the code, journalists must have a lawful reason to report personal data, with whether it is lawful resting heavily on whether it is in the public interest.
It requires publishers to create policies on how they make public interest decisions, and to keep records of those decisions.
The editors argue this system can not function in a newsroom setting.
As well as asking the Government to exempt the media from data protection laws, they also asked the ICO to revisit the code to better reflect the realities of journalism.
The DCMS has been contacted for comment.