With power comes responsibility, warns Martin Moore of the Hacked Off campaign 
To improve the culture, practice and ethics of the press, we must protect and promote the best of journalism. Alan Rusbridger makes the case for a new settlementIndex relies entirely on the support of donors and readers to do its work.
Help us keep amplifying censored voices today.
Prev
Next
Would it have been OK to hack Jimmy Savile's phone?
As already mentioned on this blog, at least one editor has said the libel laws made him nervous of printing allegations of broadcaster Jimmy Savile’s abuse of young girls. There are certainly more complex reasons behind the failure to properly report the story in the past, but it is worth looking at the broader ethical questions the case raises. Former trustee and long-time associate of Index on Censorship Mark Stephens has posed one such question on Twitter this morning.
Moral dilemma of the day: would it have been ok to phone hack Jimmy Savile to get evidence and expose his child abuse and grooming? #leveson
— Mark Stephens (@MarksLarks) October 11, 2012
Or, to generalise the question: what kind of issue justifies intrusion and subterfuge on the part of journalists? And what level of intrusion and subterfuge? It’s a problem Lord Justice Leveson’s panel of assessors is bound to be discussing. What do you think?