It wasn’t an invasion of privacy to report on and publish a video of a man being hit and killed by a police car because it was newsworthy and handled sensitively.
The man’s family complained to the UK press regulator the Independent Press Standards Organisation over the Mail Online’s coverage. The Mail’s video and still image coverage didn’t show the moment the man was hit.
The Mail defended its coverage, saying it was newsworthy to publish the police-involved incident and noting it didn’t show “the moment of impact.” The Mail did unpublish the video two days after publication after the complaint.
While IPSO acknowledged the family was justifiably upset, it noted “the footage had been taken from some distance, in relatively low resolution, so that the man’s features and appearance were not clear in the video, which featured no sound.” Further, IPSO found it to be “factual and non-sensational” reporting with the actual impact censored, so it was OK to publish.