Liam Payne: Journalistic Ethics Are Often Ignored When Celebrities Die

(MENAFN- The Conversation) When someone famous dies, particularly if they are young or it was unexpected, it is natural for their fans to want to know what happened. But, as the reporting on the tragic death of singer Liam Payne shows, the media does not always handle this appropriately or ethically.

The singer, 31, fell to his death from the third floor of a hotel in Buenos Aires while under the influence of“drugs or alcohol”, local Police said. LA-based celebrity news website TMZ initially reported the story alongside graphic images of Payne's body.

After a backlash, TMZ removed the photos, but executive editor Michael Babock defended publication, claiming the site was“trying to confirm reports Liam had died before police had established his identity”.

Other mainstream outlets published transcripts or recordings of a 911 call made to police shortly before Payne was found, and an Argentinian newspaper published images of Payne's hotel room which included images of drugs paraphernalia.

This is certainly not the first time the media, and TMZ in particular, has come under fire for insensitive or harmful reporting of celebrity deaths. When basketball great Kobe Bryant died in a helicopter crash in January 2020, TMZ shared the news before police were able to notify his family. Bryant's widow later testified that she learned of her husband and daughter's deaths through social media. This breaches the UK's journalism codes of practice.

In their quest to get a scoop, what precautions and sensitivities do journalists have to respect when it comes to reporting sudden and tragic deaths?

The ethical standards and guidelines vary from country to country. In the UK, these are set out by the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) and independent press monitor Impress for print media, and by Ofcom for broadcasters.

An Ipso clause around intrusion into grief and shock says journalists should make enquiries with“sympathy and discretion” and publication should be handled“sensitively”.

Ofcom has similar guidelines for broadcasters. The section on privacy states:“When people are caught up in events which are covered by the news they still have a right to privacy.”

This can be infringed if“warranted”, says Ofcom, for example if it is in the public interest. This could include revealing or detecting crime, protecting public health or safety, exposing misleading claims or disclosing incompetence. But a tragic death, even of a high profile person, is unlikely to meet this standard.

Broadcasters should not interview or film people who have experienced a personal tragedy unless it is“warranted” or they have given consent. And journalists are advised not to“reveal the identity of someone who has died unless it is clear that the next of kin have been informed”.

Impress , which regulates more independent journalism, has released a statement condemning the reporting of Payne's death.

It said:“The defence of publishing in the public interest does not give outlets carte blanche to report the most intimate details of a celebrity's life, or their death.”

It is important to state at this stage that what happened prior to Payne's tragic death and his intentions at the time are unknown. It is the job of the coroner to investigate and come to a conclusion at his inquest.

Beyond accuracy and respect for the victim of a tragedy and their family, there are wider concerns that journalists should take into account.

Research conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) has shown irresponsible media reporting of celebrity deaths, particularly suicides , can increase suicide rates.

One study examining patterns of suicide and media coverage found that in the five months following comic Robin Williams' death in 2014, there were 1,841 more deaths from suicide in the USA compared to the same period the previous year – a 9.85% rise.

The WHO's international guidelines for reporting suicide urge the media to avoid sensationalism. Journalists should not provide details about methods, and should include information about mental health resources in stories.

Analysis of over 100 academic studies found repeated coverage and high-profile news stories were most strongly associated with copycat behaviour .

The WHO states:“Such stories can inadvertently function as celebrity endorsements of suicidal behaviour and it is known that celebrity endorsements can have an impact on behaviour of the public.”

Sensitive reporting can reduce the risk of copycat suicides. Providing context in relation to mental health challenges and offering resources for support is vital.

In the UK, guidelines were first drawn up by the Samaritans charity in 1994 to improve reporting on suicide and prevent copycat attempts. These are taught to journalism students on courses accredited by the National Council for the Training of Journalists .

Guidance includes avoiding“dramatic” headlines, emotive or sensational pictures or video footage and excessive amounts of coverage. Not speculating about the trigger or cause is urged, because it can oversimplify the issue.

“Coverage that reflects the wider issues around suicide, including that it is preventable, can help reduce the risk of suicidal behaviour”, the guidelines state.“Include clear and direct references to resources and support organisations.”

Despite all of these guidelines, many media outlets flout them in the race for clicks. It is heartening that there has been so much outrage at the publication of the images of Payne, but some members of the public still seem to have an insatiable appetite for it. Nothing, it seems, is off limits.

We need to take collective responsibility. Journalists and editors should reacquaint themselves with responsible reporting guidelines and put themselves in the bereaved family's shoes. Members of the public can also do their bit by not clicking on or sharing this kind of material, so editorial priorities change.

Ultimately, our thoughts must be with Payne and his loved ones. A death so young is a real tragedy and those who loved him will be affected for the rest of their lives.

If you're struggling with suicidal thoughts, the following services can provide you with support: In the UK and Ireland – call Samaritans UK at 116 123. In the US – call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-TALK (8255) or IMAlive at 1-800-784-2433. In Australia – call Lifeline Australia at 13 11 14. In other countries – visit IASP or Suicide to find a helpline in your country.

MENAFN18102024000199003603ID1108795555