Another great headline from the Sun – but at what cost?

“Order! Order! The Rt. Honourable member for Wandsworth. Come to the office,” shouted the Sun’s headline on March 13, the first day of Chris Huhne’s prison sentence.

Phew, what a corker! In fact another great headline and story from the ‘soaraway Sun‘ – current, amusing, suitably irreverent and an exclusive.

However, Huhne’s partner, Ms Trimingham, was quick to object: “There was no tannoy announcement, full-stop.” She also poured scorn on other parts of the story.

So was the Sun’s story true? Clearly I don’t know – it’s the Sun’s word against Ms Trimingham’s. And it could be argued that it doesn’t matter anyway, because Huhne had it coming.

Additionally, this can be added to a long line of famous Sun headlines, from ‘Freddie Starr ate my hamster’ in 1986 to ‘It’s The Sun Wot Won It’ following the Conservative election win in 1992. Those headlines, though not necessarily true, certainly caught the mood of the time.

However, call me an old stick in the mud (or probably a lot worse), but I think it is extremely important that headlines, and of course the supporting story, are true and this is more important today than it has ever been.

Why?

Firstly, because the world has changed.

Arguably, Kelvin MacKenzie was the greatest 20th century editor of a popular tabloid newspaper, and that was reflected in the Sun’s circulation and popularity during the 1980s and early 1990s along with its fame for headlines and irreverent stories, often tenably in spite of the truth.

An approach which was much admired and loved by its readers, but one that today would be at odds with current attitudes – its homophobia (‘The Poofs of Pop’ and ‘Eastbenders’), its jingoism (‘Gotcha’) and of course its awful error in its coverage of the Hillsborough tragedy (‘The Truth’).

The 21st century is a very different world and the Sun’s approach back then would, today, look dated, irrelevant and often inappropriate. Perhaps even sometimes as grotesque as a re-run of a Jimmy Savile episode of Top of the Pops.

The second reason is because the media world has changed.

In the last 15 years or so there has been a dramatic transformation in the world of media due to the inexorable rise of new technologies and the way that consumers now use the media. While convergence hasn’t quite become as prevalent as many predicted, the lines between the various media (new and old) are increasingly blurred.

Consequently, media consumption now tends to operate on a ‘funnel’ basis – stories break in one media and are then developed and followed across all the other various media channels. In this regard there is no doubt that TV and newspapers still remain the main ‘gateway media’.

They still have the power, influence and efficacy to launch the most important stories and content – whether it’s a major social event or political disgrace, e.g. from the Olympics coverage to the Chris Huhne scandal. (Interestingly, to date I can’t think of too many major stories or events that have broken on the internet in spite of its penetration, immediacy and social currency.)

So, in my view at least, newspapers retain their potency for reporting and commenting on major news stories, despite those who suggest that newspapers are doomed. But this brings with it a responsibility which has greater significance and accountability in today’s ‘multi layered’ world of media – if newspapers are going to continue to be a gateway medium what they say has to be true. Yes – entertaining, current and relevant – but most importantly true.

The third reason is because attitudes to the behaviour of newspapers have changed.

Arguments over the Leveson Inquiry still rumble on. The newspapers continue to argue against regulation underpinned by a Royal Charter (as recommended by Leveson) and maintain that a new-styled self-regulation should be applied.

Although they were supported by Cameron, they appear to have lost the argument in the face of political pressure from Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband, and of course as a result of pressure from the Hacked Off lobby group.

Those in favour of freedom of the press (which we all should be) continue to argue against the proposed new regulative approach for newspapers. But where is the public in this?

Clearly, the public is unconcerned by the potential ramifications of the Royal Charter and I suspect not because it is not concerned about press freedom from political interference but because too many newspapers (and too often) seem to have abused their position and there is the feeling that they need to be reined in

By the way, the advertising industry operates an effective example of self-regulation, and not primarily because it has a process by which it can effectively police and implement its rules and regulations, although this does exist.

No, the advertising industry recognises that self-regulation should start at the source, which means that advertisers and their agencies do their utmost to ensure that their claims are ‘legal’, ‘decent’, ‘honest’ and ‘truthful’.

This, I would argue, in the vast majority of instances is the case – and certainly for major advertisers. Can all the major newspapers make the same claim? (Is Jim Bowen the new Pope, even if he does bare an uncanny resemblance?)

So back to the Sun’s headline…

Personally, I don’t think it was true and I also don’t believe the rest of the story either. If I’m wrong, I apologise. If I’m right, this smart and funny headline has done the Sun, News Corporation and the newspaper industry in general more damage to its credibility at a time when it can ill afford further questions about its integrity.

Jim Marshall is the chief client officer at Aegis.