[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image="50229" img_size="full" alignment="center"][vc_column_text]By Alice WatkinsNew research carried out by Hacked Off has revealed the strikingly low proportion of "Intrusion into grief or shock" complaints upheld against the press.

Of 257 complaints of press intrusion into grief to be processed by the sham regulator, only 7 have ever been upheld.

That's less than 3%, and leaves up to 250 individuals and families to have faced press intrusion at a time of distress without remedy from IPSO.

But you won't read their stories in the newspapers.

There are provisions against this kind of press treatment which are set out in the Editors Code of Practice.

Clause 4 of the Editors' Code, "Intrusion into grief or shock", states,

Enquiries and approaches must be made with sympathy and discretion and publication handled sensitively.

But our research suggests that IPSO is failing to enforce them adequately.

The Press and the PeopleIn fact, our new film shares the stories of four people who faced press misconduct after a bereavement.[/vc_column_text][vc_video link="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hseOoW2qHmI" el_width="50" align="center"][vc_column_text]Newspaper editors tell us that ‘everything has changed’ since Leveson’s report 10 years ago.

But nothing has changed. All of the people featured in The Press and the People experienced press intrusion after Leveson, in just the last few years.

National newspapers get away with this because IPSO is not fit for purpose and cannot be trusted to enforce standards effectively.

The only way to protect ordinary people from press intrusion after a traumatic event is proper regulation, as recommended by Sir Brian Leveson.Access the data for this research here.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]