OPINION: The public’s right to know: Mr Toad’s last ride?

“At every word a reputation dies.” Alexander Pope

Let’s be clear about this from the very start. I do not know Councillor Phil Bethell, have never met him and have never voted either for or against him. He means nothing to me whatsoever. Got that? Right, let me begin...

Although I do not know him, I was following the latest intrigue with interest. There is nothing like the headline ‘Politician Accused’ and the whiff of some emerging sex-scandal to make us sit up and take notice.

And of course, if the alleged perpetrator is a politician or perhaps a celebrity of some sort, then we can even claim that our curiosity is fuelled not just by a low-rent desire to put our eye to the keyhole as we watch the sordid details unravel before our very eyes, we can stand up on our hind legs in outraged moral indignation and claim that our thirst for all the gory details stems not merely from a desire to join the feeding frenzy as we grub gleefully through the soiled underwear basket but rather from that most sacred of holy cows; The Public Right To Know.

The Bethell case made me particularly uncomfortable for some reason. I felt that somehow, to mix my metaphors slightly, I had fallen into a trap and was slowly being reeled in. Easiest thing in the world in politics; to make an anonymous complaint about an opponent, preferably from within your own party, and then watch from the sidelines as the man’s career and reputation begin to unravel in front of the baying, slavering pack of news-hungry hounds.

It matters not a jot whether there is a grain of truth in any of the allegations. It is of no consequence if it is found that there is no case to answer. The complainant gets to watch all the fun of the fair; often from a front row seat and as the complaint was made anonymously there is absolutely no comeback.

The saddest thing is that in this scenario, the complainant, who for ease of reference I shall henceforth refer to as Mr Loathsome-Toad, has a great but often unwitting ally in all of this and that is the media who, responding to the public’s clamour for their right to know, feeds the public with hard facts when it has any, which is often rare, or speculation and salacious gossip when it hasn’t. Guilty or innocent, a bit of mud will always stick and a once clean copy-book will now carry some sort of blot.

Now it seems that there is to be welcome sea-change; at least as far as Rochdale Online is concerned. Don’t worry, when a trial or inquiry has taken place and all the facts have emerged, they will be faithfully and dutifully recorded and reported. Until then, Rochdale Online has decided that it will no longer be an unwilling and unwitting partner of Mr Loathsome-Toad and will no longer publish the names of those accused until such time as they are found guilty of something.

Call it what you will; a blow for fair play, a voluntary curtailment of the freedom of the press over the desire to protect the rights of the individual, a refusal to be an unwitting accomplice of the aforementioned green, slimy character?

I just prefer to think of it as a step in the right direction.

Goodbye Mr Loathsome-Toad, get back in the swamp where you belong.