News

YouGov Poll: Public backs Court’s decision in Cliff Richard Case, 86% favour investigation anonymity

25/07/2018

A YouGov opinion poll conducted on 19 and 20 July 2018 has shown overwhelming public support for pre-charge anonymity of suspects. The results are startling: 86% of respondents support the anonymity of suspects under inviestgation and 83% support the anonymity of those arrested.Mr Justice Mann’s decision in Sir Cliff Richard v BBC that the claimant had a right to privacy when under investigation has been subject to almost universal criticism in the press. It has been suggested that this a serious threat to press freedom. Few media outlets have published the contrary view that the right to privacy of suspects should generally prevail.The poll results show that the public has not been convinced by the one sided media coverage of the Cliff Richard judgment.A striking feature of the poll is that, contrary to the current approach of the courts, a majority of the public (60%) favour post-charge pre-trial anonymity with 62% favouring anonymity for those on trial who have not yet been found guilty of an offence. This accords with the position in a number of other European countries.It is only after conviction that the large majority favour the naming of individuals, with 88% in favour of the publication of the name at that stage.As with press regulation (where a majority of the public favour statutory regulation) the press are out of step with their readers on an issue which involves their own interests.The details of the polls are set out here:

The full results of the poll can be found here [pdf].

This piece was originally posted on Inforrm and is republished with thanks.

Download the full report:

Download report

Queries: campaign@hackinginquiry.org

related Posts

A year and two days: the story of one complaint to IPSO
Guest blog: Chris Goodall's complaint about fifteen errors in a Daily Mail article took IPSO a year and two days to decide. Here he publishes the full timeline — more than 80 emails, hundreds of hours of work, and one correction.
9/22/26
News
SLAPPs and the press: why the Anti-SLAPP Bill is the wrong answer
The private members Bill promoted by Baroness Stowell and Sir John Whittingdale would apply to any claim touching a matter of public interest, however meritorious and however properly brought. Hacked Off sets out why it would harm victims of press abuse, and why section 40 was the better answer.
9/21/26
News
Coverage of Professor Arday was not legitimate: the letter The Times refused to publish
Guest blog: Professor Paul Wragg replies to the letter published in The Times on 25 August defending the press coverage of Professor Jason Arday. The Times declined to publish his reply. We publish it here in full.
8/28/26
News
Defensive, evasive & hypocritical: The press reaction to the death of Jason Arday
The reaction of national newspapers to the death of Professor Jason Arday has exposed a brittle defensiveness at the heart of the press, and a determination to remain outside any meaningful accountability.
8/26/26
News