AddThis SmartLayers

New guidelines set to restrict contact between journalists and police

Journalists should only be briefed off the record by police officers in exceptional circumstances, according to new guidelines.

The College of Policing has issued new draft guidance on media relations, which offer a non-exhaustive list of circumstances in which officers should seek the aid of their press offices before speaking to the media.

The guidelines also discourage use of the term ‘off the record’ to avoid “ambiguity” about how such information is used.

They instead urge the use of the terms ‘reportable’ and ‘non-reportable’ when dealing with journalists.

The guidelines state that as a key principle police officers should communicate directly with the media if they are the person responsible for communicating about a particular issue and if there is a “policing purpose” for doing so.

“Officers and staff of all ranks and roles are encouraged to provide factual information to the media concerning operational incidents or investigations for which they have personal responsibility,” the guidance says.

However the guidelines also note that “if in doubt”, officers and staff should refer to a press officer before speaking to the media.

A list of circumstances in which this may occur includes:

  • All serious crime appeals
  • All incidents involving a fatality
  • Media appeals for high-risk missing persons
  • Media appeals for wanted or dangerous persons
  • Release of any image of a known, named person (missing/wanted/convicted/subject to a court order or other legal restriction)
  • All matters relating to security or terrorism
  • A hate crime or hate incident
  • Critical incidents or those with organisational reputational vulnerability
  • Incidents involving high-profile figures such as celebrities or VIPs
  • Any incident declared serious or major
  • Any enquiry about sex offenders
  • Requests for evidential material
  • Appeals following arrest or charge
  • Documentary requests
  • Interview requests relating to force policy
  • Anything relating to national media, including Crimewatch.

The guidance defines ‘non-reportable’ speaking terms as: “Information provided to the media on the basis that it is for guidance only and not for publication or broadcast. It can be used to provide further context around a statement.

“This enables police to have a dialogue with the media about serious or sensitive policing issues without generating publicity about them. A note of the subject or subjects discussed should be kept by the officer or a communications officer and recorded.”

The report also offers guidance on the release of information on arrests, charges and judicial outcomes to the media – giving the example that an incident reported as ‘rape’ should be described as such in all communications.

It also advises against the naming of arrested persons or crime suspects “save in exceptional circumstances” such as a threat to life, the prevention or detection of crime, or where police have made a public warning about a wanted individual.

The guidelines state that if a name or names are put to the police with a request for confirmation of an arrest the response given should be “we neither confirm nor deny”, and that no guidance should be given.

In relation to details around non-suspicious deaths, the guidance adds: “Details of non-suspicious sudden deaths should only be proactively issued if there is an operational policing reason to do so.

“Information that a body has been found can be confirmed following an enquiry from the media, but nothing should be released that could identify the deceased.”

A consultation on the draft guidelines is now under way and runs until 8 July.

9 comments

You can follow all replies to this entry through the comments feed.
  • May 25, 2016 at 4:05 pm
    Permalink

    In my experience, in each police middle manager there’s a banana republic dictator wanting to get out. They don’t want any news they can’t control or spin, they don’t want any knowledge of crime reported unless it’s for their own ends.

    We used to get news pieces sent through all the time about a particular night club by the police because they wanted it shutting down as it was too much hard work, the rest of the time though if they were to be believed the town had a lower crime rate than Heaven.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(7)
  • May 25, 2016 at 6:48 pm
    Permalink

    All part of the cover up culture – you’d never believe they were funded by the taxpayer!

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(4)
  • May 26, 2016 at 9:29 am
    Permalink

    At Christmas, the reporters would take a box of fags around to the local Nick as a token of appreciation for the help given by the police in giving information about crime, accidents etc. The inspector would keep 250 for himself and dole out the rest to the bobbies.
    There was no bribery intended, it was just an act of human kindness. All this, of course, was a long time ago.
    How things change!

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(1)
  • May 26, 2016 at 10:31 am
    Permalink

    maigret.

    True. My local JP rag has not made a call to our cop shop for at least three years. Long gone are days when journos sat and had a cup of tea with the DI or the Inspector most mornings and went to the cops annual booze-up (by taxi of course). It was quite usual for me to pick up a story at 8.30 am and file it by 9am for that day’s paper if it was worth the rush.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(2)
  • May 26, 2016 at 11:42 am
    Permalink

    Nothing new about these “guidelines”

    The police have been behaving like that for years.

    Last time I asked an Inspector for a bit of off-the-record guidance about an arrest he said “That’s more than my pension’s worth.”

    Very helpful, I’m sure.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(2)
  • May 26, 2016 at 1:27 pm
    Permalink

    I remember one morning in the 1980s when I was working on a weekly and filling in for the reporter who normally did the police calls. A sergeant I had never met before told me a newspaper boy had been knocked over and killed by a drunk local solicitor on his way back from an office Christmas party. “Take a look at this and see what you can print,” he said, handing over the incident book. I don’t suppose that happens these days.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(5)
  • May 26, 2016 at 1:40 pm
    Permalink

    250 fags for the inspector that is. 250 for the rest of the bobbies.
    Someone’s just been asking…sorry!

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • May 26, 2016 at 4:36 pm
    Permalink

    It was always amusing seeing the attitude of older editors when you were on the job, I once got told to walk up to a copper who was standing guard at a crime scene and say I wasn’t leaving until he gave me the name of the rape victim.

    Haha, indeed!

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)