Two regional editors have told the Leveson Inquiry that police press officers are restricting the flow of information to journalists and the public.
Adrian Faber, editor of the Express and Star, and Tim Gordon, editor of the South Wales Echo, were giving evidence to the inquiry on press standards yesterday.
Both said that the involvement of police press offices acted as a “barrier to information” about the extent of crime in local areas.
Tim said press officers could be “terribly slow” at releasing information, while Adrian suggested they were seeking to “manipulate” public perceptions of crime levels.
Said Tim: “I understand from talking to my reporters that it can be difficult to get information quickly from the police, who tend to channel most things through their press office.
“The police tend to be willing to release information when it suits their agenda…but the police can be terribly slow at releasing information or even confirming information on incidents that are happening/ongoing.
“My view is that press offices have value and are needed to co-ordinate briefings across the media sector. They also allow officers to get on with the job in hand.
“However they can be a barrier to information being released and they can be slow to grant access.”
Adrian said that the introduction of press officers at West Midlands Police had created “a tier of bureaucracy” between journalists and police officers.
“It regularly makes it difficult to get a clear picture and detailed information about an incident…I think it’s fair to say that in consequence the vast majority of crime and criminal activity that does not end up in court goes unreported.
Adrian said press officers “did not have the tme or resource to deal with enquiries about low-level crime which is of interest to our readers.
“Inevitably, I argue that it is far better to release the information and make residents aware, than it is to try to manipulate their perceptions by withholding the detail.”
The editors were also asked about whether their journalists had provided hospitality to police officers.
Adrian reveealed that the Express & Star’s crime reporter had taken police officers to watch Wolverhampton Wanderers and West Bromwich Albion football matches on several occasions.
“We have a corporate hospitality arrangement with both Wolverhampton Wanderers and West Bromwich Albion and regularly take contacts and advertisers to local football matches. The hospitality at the football matches involved a meal, drinks and watching the game.
“On four or five occasions in the past five years, our crime reporter has taken police officers out for a drink. This has been an informal way of discussing our work.”
Sign up for our free daily email bulletin
Follow HTFP on Twitter
Got a story? Email the Editor at
Exactly right. Police press officers’ key priority seems to be preventing “fear of crime”. The easiest way to do that is to sit on information, refuse to confirm details and take ages to respond – that way we can’t report it and the poor little public don’t have to worry their pretty little heads about it.
Until we all accept the truth is better than pretending there is no crime, this situation will not improve.
Report this comment
I would also blame the editors who have either scrapped the crime reporter role or allowed their crime reporters to rely on police press offices rather than speaking to officers. There are plenty of examples of this around.
Report this comment
It is a strong, long-held view of mine as an editor of 37 years that crime figures are ‘manipulated.’ I laugh when I hear the Scottish government announce reduced crime figures because, in fact, it is only a reduction in the amount of crimes ‘recorded’ by the police.
I have a case before the Freedom of Information Commissioner as a result of Strathclyde Police telling me in writing that they give the names of deceased who are killed in road accidents, fires, industrial accidents and murders but not for drowning (which involved every public service imaginable).
Report this comment
Northumbria Police Press Office have a habit of only publicising crimes where they know there is a good chance of a quick result and some good publicity. The crimes that should be publicised, those where the public can help, are frequently kept secret, sometimes for months. Then, when the investigating officers have drawn a complete blank, they make an appeal for witnesses when anyone who might have remembered even a tiny detail will have completely forgotten about it.
Report this comment
Last year the police’s press officers did all they could to cover up a stabbing in a town we cover, which was very frustrating. They sent out a three- or four-par release saying someone had been “attacked”, and any attempt to glean ANY further information (weapons, nature of injuries, victim’s condition) was met with the rote response: “We feel we’ve said everything we need to say”. Only when we threatened to ‘publish and be damned’, based on what eyewitnesses told us, did they back down. As a further insult, when we tried to do a follow-up on the 12-month anniversary, it took them a month to get back to us confirming no-one had been caught.
Report this comment
Drew is spot on. The main focus for the police and their hired cohorts is to follow their own agenda – and that means tackling what they see as the public perception (most often correct) of high crime and violent no-go areas. So they peddle the line that crime is down when it isn’t. Recorded crime may be down, but actual crime is quite another thing. My old dad had his car vandalised so many times that he simply gave up reporting it. “What’s the point?” They never do anything about it” was his reason. Police only tell the press what they want us to know and we have to find other, old-fashioned, legal ways of finding out what is going on.
Report this comment
police press officers – the world’s most useless, obstructive profession (and we pay their wages!)
Report this comment
One PPO I deal with (or try to avoid), often has the answer “I don’t know” for every question asked. I frequently have to prompt him to look at the police log to clarify details – basic stuff such as where soemthing happened, ages of victims/offenders etc.
It’s not rocket science, but every day feels like a battle.
Worringly, he once served as a police officer. Wonder if he would ever say “I dunno” or “haven’t got a clue” to victims of crime?
Report this comment
I think a lot of it comes down to whether or not PPOs have experience in journalism.
If they do, they understand where you’re coming from and try their best to provide extra info and hit deadlines. If not, and they just live in their own police propaganda bubble.
Report this comment
West Midlands Police released crime stats showing crime had reduced across the region in August 2011 compared to August 2010.
Seeing as we had three days of riots last year, I was amazed – turns out each one was recorded as one incident, regardless of how many people were involved.
If that’s not manipulation, I don’t know what is!
Report this comment
The annoying thing is that many officers still want to talk to us – some are still doing a good job.
The police press officer is simply a gatekeeper who is there to ensure the corporate line is adhered to and that officers are gagged before they step out of line. They are there to cut ‘Fear of Crime’ but have also been responsible for ‘fear of talking to the press’.
Cutting lower level crime is easy! Simply close all the station enquiry offices and keep people hanging on the telephone for 20 minutes when they try to report a crime. It works well but these days nobody believes the figures.
Report this comment
This piece on the website of freelance journalist Nigel Green about the troubles we have with Northumbria Police…
http://www.nigelgreenmedia.com/northumbriapolice.html
Report this comment
I used to deal with PPOs in a London borough and they were serving police officers who had been drafted into the press office. No press/journalism background (or training, it appeared), low literacy levels and zero understanding of media law.
Many times I had to go back to them to get ages, addresses etc. Often told data protection prevented them giving addresses of convicted offenders.
I always told them I would not publish without an age and address.
Report this comment
I think the days of taking police officers out for a drink and gleaning juicy tit bits from them are long gone, more so after what went on with the Met/NoW.
When I was a young hack someone was regularly sent to the local police station on a morning to meet a sergeant or inspector who would open up the previous day’s crime log to them to crib whatever they wanted from it. That too has gone.
Now the flow of information between the police and media is much more strictly controlled.
The worst press offices are the ones who try to put a positive spin on everything (crime figures, etc). Then there are the ultra-defensive ones who really don’t want to help you at all if they can help it.
That said they are not all bad. There are still a few press officers out there that are happy to give an off the record steer on events, but they are a dying breed unfortunately.
Report this comment