Judge backs privacy ruling
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 High Court yesterday upheld a ruling by the Broadcasting Complaints Commission that parents of two people who died in tragic circumstances should have been warned before television programmes were broadcast which brought back the distress of the deaths.
Mr Justice Popplewell said the commission was 'perfectly entitled' to take the view that two programmes screened by Granada Television's World In Action some time after the deaths amounted to 'unwarranted infringement of privacy'.
He rejected an application from Granada for the watchdog body's decision to be quashed.
One programme featured, without warning, a photograph of nine-year-old Annette Wade, from Blackpool, who was murdered in 1989. The other showed a picture of Helen Sandford, 21, an anorexia victim from Bournemouth, who died in 1987.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments