NEWSPAPER PRACTICE
– 251 candidates;
148 passed (59 per cent)

All candidates spotted that defamation was a problem they faced in the scenarios of both law questions of this examination.

It was the sole issue in the first question where it called for a sound understanding of qualified privilege and an awareness of the defence of consent.

In the alternative question it was sadly not seen by everyone as a secondary issue with the main problem being the danger of contempt.

While nearly all candidates were able to spot that qualified privilege would attach to their reports of the relevant proceedings, subject to the usual requirements, one in ten forgot that the basic purpose of any defence was to enable otherwise actionable statements to be published avoiding liability for actual or potential damage. This surprisingly sizeable minority correctly stated it was safe to report the proceedings with the protection of qualified privilege but then added that this was provided that nothing was included that would fit one or all of the accepted definitions of defamation.

And for good measure several then attributed correctly stated definitions to the 1996 Defamation Act!

Markers could only think that on this evidence there must be a lot of good and safe stories being ignored on several newspapers.

The three general questions were all within the perceived competence range of a newly qualified senior reporter – the status that success in the NCE confers.

Among other things the questions gave candidates the opportunity to demonstrate their local knowledge and contacts. Many took advantage of this and demonstrated that they knew their patches. It was time-consuming but the names of local sources they said they would approach were all, where appropriate, checked on the internet.

Only one school failed to check out, though another (church) school was named in copy after the wrong saint.

The scenarios in the questions were topical. They may even have prepared candidates for subsequent assignments. Obesity among the younger generation has developed into a major topic since the examination while school league tables can be expected to produce the usual controversy when next published.

Spring was the time of year that charity fund raisers start undertaking marathon sponsored tasks. Thankfully not many get into serious difficulty but reporters at this stage of their career should be able to deal with an incident occurring 200 miles off their patch and involving serious injury to one of their local celebrities.

There were some good answers but also some very woolly thinking that would not guarantee a useable story within the two hours available. Although many would have dealt adequately with the situation had they known where the accident occurred, there were far too many candidates glibly stating they would telephone the police in the area without indicating how they intended to discover which area it was? Once again theory and practice appeared at odds with each other.

Several candidates claimed they would observe the Code of Practice on intrusion but went on to say they would seek “details of the accident” and “reaction to it” by contacting on her mobile phone the injured man’s wife who, they were told, had left an hour ago to be with him.

Click for more on this year’s: