This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2013/apr/19/rolf-harris-sun

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
The Sun was right to publish Harris story in the face of legal threats Sun was right to publish Rolf Harris story in the face of legal threats
(35 minutes later)
The Sun engaged in an old print media trick last night by publishing a dummy first edition front page before running with a "world exclusive" - the arrest of TV personality Rolf Harris.The Sun engaged in an old print media trick last night by publishing a dummy first edition front page before running with a "world exclusive" - the arrest of TV personality Rolf Harris.
This manoeuvre is designed to prevent rivals "borrowing" a story and it appears to have worked. It was hours after publication, even in these digital days, before the rest of Fleet Street caught up.This manoeuvre is designed to prevent rivals "borrowing" a story and it appears to have worked. It was hours after publication, even in these digital days, before the rest of Fleet Street caught up.
It is also possible that the paper's sleight-of-hand was aimed at avoiding legal action to prevent publication because the real story behind this story is all about the reason for the long delay between Harris's arrest and mainstream media's reporting of it.It is also possible that the paper's sleight-of-hand was aimed at avoiding legal action to prevent publication because the real story behind this story is all about the reason for the long delay between Harris's arrest and mainstream media's reporting of it.
When Harris was arrested on 28 March, all that the police would say was that "an 82-year-old man from Berkshire" had been arrested by officers working for Operation Yewtree. This was the investigation launched into alleged sexual abuse by Jimmy Savile.When Harris was arrested on 28 March, all that the police would say was that "an 82-year-old man from Berkshire" had been arrested by officers working for Operation Yewtree. This was the investigation launched into alleged sexual abuse by Jimmy Savile.
However, there is a strand of the inquiry unrelated to Savile (and not necessarily involving child abuse) that is simply called "others". It was evidently under this strand that Harris was detained.However, there is a strand of the inquiry unrelated to Savile (and not necessarily involving child abuse) that is simply called "others". It was evidently under this strand that Harris was detained.
Following his arrest, Harris - who turned 83 two days later - was named on social media sites. Certain blogs subsequently named him too. But newspapers did not.Following his arrest, Harris - who turned 83 two days later - was named on social media sites. Certain blogs subsequently named him too. But newspapers did not.
Why? It would appear that several national titles (though not The Guardian) received letters from Harris's lawyers, Harbottle & Lewis, warning them against identifying their client.Why? It would appear that several national titles (though not The Guardian) received letters from Harris's lawyers, Harbottle & Lewis, warning them against identifying their client.
Earlier this week, the law firm sent a letter to a relatively obscure website, bleedingcool.com, demanding that it take down two stories that named Harris. The solicitor argued that it defamed Harris. Earlier this week, the law firm sent a letter to a relatively obscure website, demanding that it take down two stories that named Harris. The solicitor argued that it defamed Harris.
But there is no law against identifying a person who has been formally arrested. Its argument is therefore baffling.But there is no law against identifying a person who has been formally arrested. Its argument is therefore baffling.
In its article, The Sun offered what amounts to a defence for publishing the story: "The Met have repeatedly refused to confirm that Harris had been quizzed — amid public concerns over 'secret' arrests."In its article, The Sun offered what amounts to a defence for publishing the story: "The Met have repeatedly refused to confirm that Harris had been quizzed — amid public concerns over 'secret' arrests."
Though it wasn't secret - it was anonymous - the paper's substantive argument sounds fair enough to me. If someone is arrested, then it is justifiable to report that fact. We can't have a situation in which the police decide whether an arrested person is named or not, which appears to be current practice.Though it wasn't secret - it was anonymous - the paper's substantive argument sounds fair enough to me. If someone is arrested, then it is justifiable to report that fact. We can't have a situation in which the police decide whether an arrested person is named or not, which appears to be current practice.
Our crime and justice system must operate in daylight. The identities of people who are arrested should not be confidential matters.Our crime and justice system must operate in daylight. The identities of people who are arrested should not be confidential matters.
An individual may well feel it unfair and possibly prejudicial, ahead of any potential charge, to be identified at the point of arrest. But there is a wider public interest in knowing about such matters.An individual may well feel it unfair and possibly prejudicial, ahead of any potential charge, to be identified at the point of arrest. But there is a wider public interest in knowing about such matters.
We are all surely aware that people, whether arrested and/or charged, are innocent until proved guilty. For their part, newspapers must play a straight bat by not publishing anything likely to prejudice a fair trial.We are all surely aware that people, whether arrested and/or charged, are innocent until proved guilty. For their part, newspapers must play a straight bat by not publishing anything likely to prejudice a fair trial.
One may feel sorry for people who are arrested and then bailed by the police, sometimes for months at a time. That didn't used to be the case but has, sadly, become custom and practice.One may feel sorry for people who are arrested and then bailed by the police, sometimes for months at a time. That didn't used to be the case but has, sadly, become custom and practice.
In the United States, for instance, the act of being arrested is synonymous with being charged. Here, there is a difference and a time lag between the two.In the United States, for instance, the act of being arrested is synonymous with being charged. Here, there is a difference and a time lag between the two.
It does mean that there are occasions when innocents are arrested and never charged, and we may well question that system. We may also sympathise with such people.It does mean that there are occasions when innocents are arrested and never charged, and we may well question that system. We may also sympathise with such people.
That should not stop the media from knowing and reporting what the police are up to. That's part of our journalistic remit after all.That should not stop the media from knowing and reporting what the police are up to. That's part of our journalistic remit after all.