Editors have agreed to change their Code of Practice in order to strengthen protection for the victims of sex offences.

Clause 11 of the Code, which concerns the victims of sexual assault, has now been amended to address the issue of journalists making enquiries about those involved in such cases.

At present, the press must not identify or publish material likely to lead to the identification of a sex assault victim.

However, the new revision now urges journalists to “take care and exercise discretion” when making enquiries about victims, in order to avoid the “unjustified disclosure” of their identity.

The amended Clause, in full, now reads: “The press must not identify or publish material likely to lead to the identification of a victim of sexual assault unless there is adequate justification and they are legally free to do so.

“Journalists are entitled to make enquiries but must take care and exercise discretion to avoid the unjustified disclosure of the identity of a victim of sexual assault.”

The Editors’ Code of Practice Committee, which writes and revises the code of standards policed by the Independent Press Standards Organisation, decided to take action after the press watchdog observed in two adjudications, involving the Daily Mail and The Sun, that Clause 11 was ambiguous and did not make clear if it applied to the process of newsgathering as well as publication.

In the case of the Mail, a freelance reporter acting on its behalf had contacted a third party about two siblings which had led to their parents finding out they were victims of sex offences, while in the case of The Sun a reporter had obtained the phone number of a victim from the occupant of their previous address.

Code of Practice Committee chairman Neil Benson, pictured, said: “When IPSO said the text of the existing clause appeared to be ambiguous, the Code Committee moved quickly to produce a revised version that makes clear that inadvertently disclosing the identity of a victim of a sexual assault without justification during newsgathering, even if nothing is published, is within the scope of Clause 11.”

In his introduction to the revised edition of the Codebook, Neil launched a strongly-worded attack on social media companies for data breaches and for failing to take action against online trolls.

He wrote: “The most recent amendments to the Code and the Codebook will help journalists to have greater clarity about what is required of them and should give the public confidence that those of us whose role is to seek out information on their behalf are doing so in the right way.”

“It is evident that since this Codebook was last updated a little over a year ago, it has become even more difficult for the public to separate the truth from a murky maelstrom of fake news, propaganda and manipulation.

“From websites peddling ‘news’ that is intended to mislead, to interference by an array of ‘bad actors’ using social media to further their often opaque agendas, the public has never been confronted with such a toxic diet of disinformation.

“Facebook’s reputation has been tarnished by spectacular breaches of user data, a failure to provide sufficient protection for children and vulnerable people who use its platform, and an aversion to transparency and accountability. Meanwhile, Twitter stands accused of failing to take adequate, effective action against anonymous online trolls. Journalists – and, in particular, women journalists – are often the victims of the vilest abuse, simply because they report facts that the trolls don’t like.

“In the world of politics, both major parties are mired in internal scandals – the Conservatives standing accused of institutionalised Islamophobia and Labour of institutionalised antisemitism. And then there’s Brexit – an unwholesome broth, brimming with myths, half-truths and barefaced lies, all served up as fact.

“Against this unedifying backdrop, the press can be proud of the effectiveness of its self-regulatory system. Where others seek to duck accountability, the press is, through a binding contractual agreement, prepared to be held to account and to offer redress to people it has wronged.”

The change comes into effect on 1 July.