By Tom Rowland

As a final hurrah before it shuffles towards the curtain to be replaced by what is probably going to be an even weaker watchdog, the PCC has belatedly issued strong reprimands against two titles for abuses surrounding door-stepping by newspapers.

The PCC hardly ever allows its complaints procedures to escalate to a full adjudication and then it hardly ever adjudicates against national newspapers but in two landmark cases it has just found against The Sun and The People for camping outside the homes of people who quite clearly do not want anything to do with reporters and photographers who just would not go away.

In one a woman, who had been the victim of a sexual assault by Max Clifford and a witness for the prosecution at his trial, won when she complained about harassment from The Sun. The paper sent a reporter around to her house four times to try and get a comment from her despite being told on each occasion that she did not want to speak.

In the second case two photographers working for The People parked outside a house hoping to trap and snap one of the occupants. It was a particularly unpleasant incident - when confronted the photographers refused to identify themselves or say who they were working for, and covered their faces when filmed on a phone. In the end the Police were called to try and get rid of them.

And then The People came up with that discredited old chestnut of an excuse that it had no control or responsibility because the pair were freelancers not directly employed by the newspaper.

For once this did not wash. The PCC adjudication says,

“Despite the conflicting versions of events, it was evident from all accounts - and corroborated by the photographs - that the photographers had continued to film and approach the complainant after he had made a clear, albeit crude, request for them to leave. Their decision to persist in their activities after the complainant had made plain his position breached Clause 4 (of the PCC Editors’Code).”

It continues, “The Commission was also troubled by the complainant's claim that the photographer had initially refused to identify himself and the publication for which he was acting.”

With The Sun the wording is quite emphatic. The adjudication says:

“Protecting vulnerable individuals from unwanted and intrusive press contacts is among the most important functions of the Editors’Code. Four separate attempts were made to contact the complainant…While individuals do sometimes change their minds about speaking to the press, this could not justify persistence in this context, particularly given the complainant’s vulnerable position.”

The PCC has been in business since the late 1980s so it has only taken it nearly 30 years to get around to looking properly at what people in vulnerable positions frequently find the most intrusive and distressing element of their ordeal. Better late than never?