³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

Key Points

• Anonymity should be offered only when there is an editorial, legal, welfare or other justification for doing so. The programme maker must consider why the person wishes to remain anonymous

• When we promise anonymity, we should make sure that we are in a position to honour that promise

• The most important question to pose to someone requesting anonymity is "Whom do you want to be anonymous from - from the general public or from people who know you well?" When disguising identities effectively, be aware that some technical solutions can be reversed, and distinctive features, such as hair, gait and voice, may need to be taken into account.

• Care should be taken not to reveal several pieces of information that could compromise a person’s anonymity when put together: so-called "jigsaw identification"

Introduction

Granting anonymity is not ideal for programme makers or for our audiences. Sources and contributors should speak on the record whenever practicable and their identities and credentials made known to the audience so that they can judge the source’s credibility, reliability and whether or not they are in a position to have sufficient knowledge of the subject or events. It should also be remembered that the methods by which we disguise identities can sometimes compromise the content we publish visually and/or aurally through blurring the image or distorting the sound, for example.

There are, however, occasions where the reporting of a story or securing a contribution depends upon using a source or contributor who wishes to remain anonymous. Anonymity should be offered only when there is an editorial, legal, welfare or other justification for doing so. The programme maker must consider why the person wishes to remain anonymous. Do they have something to hide beyond their identity?

When it is not self-evident to the audience we should explain to them the reasons why the production granted anonymity to a source. The strongest rationale for granting anonymity is simply to protect the contributor from illegitimate retaliation, harassment or undesirable consequences for providing information.

Granting Anonymity: Best Practice

When we promise anonymity, we should make sure that we are in a position to honour that promise.

We should give careful consideration before offering a blanket guarantee of anonymity because disguising someone’s identity completely is difficult to achieve.

The most important question to pose to someone requesting anonymity is "Whom do you want to be anonymous from - from the general public or from people who know you well?"

We should keep accurate and contemporaneous notes of conversations with sources and contributors about anonymity. A recording is preferable if possible.

We must ensure when promising anonymity we take into account the implications of any possible court order demanding the disclosure of our un-transmitted or un-published material. We should be aware that materials that name them might have to be disclosed and could compromise anonymity. (This includes notebooks, administrative paperwork, computer files, emails, as well as video and audio rushes.) Before taking any action, a court order should be referred to Litigation to discuss which materials might compromise the anonymity of a contributor or source.

Anonymity may also be necessary when we are unable to gain consent to show someone identifiably, for example when we are secretly filming for consumer or social research to expose anti-social or criminal practice but the individuals involved are simply illustrative of the behaviour, or not sufficiently culpable or responsible for their actions. In these instances when the person filmed either refuses to give consent or when we are unable to contact them to secure consent, then the effort to disguise their identity should be proportionate to the private information that we might inadvertently reveal.

The Editorial Guidelines outline other circumstances when it is acceptable to disguise identities in Section 8 Reporting Crime and Anti-Social Behaviour 8.4.29 – 8.3.32.

Some people have legal rights to anonymity, including victims of some offences, including rape and others with a sexual element. Individuals can waive their anonymity, but they must do this in writing.

Making Anonymity Effective

Footage and photos of people who wish to remain anonymous can be used provided the person’s face and hair are thoroughly blurred or obscured. Blurring is preferable to pixilation as the latter can be reversed. Filming someone from behind or placing an object to obscure a person’s distinctive features can be effective but again it must be done sufficiently to ensure the level of anonymity required. And finally the contributor or source’s identity can be disguised through lighting them so that their face is not visible.

When anonymity is essential, pictures should be blurred rather than pixelated, and contributions revoiced, rather than technically distorted, as both pixelation and technical distortion can be reversed. It is rare that someone will employ technical means to try to discover the identity of sources or contributors in our recordings or images. Usually this is only in the case of a criminal or serious whistleblower.

Be aware that what may appear as insignificant detail (e.g. a piece of jewellery or the way a person walks) may reveal identity to those familiar with the person.

A tattoo, an unusual watch, a distinctive item of clothing, the particular way in which someone gestures, or even the location in which we are filming, can all reveal identity. Be cautious of using footage of someone walking filmed from behind as a person’s gait can be particularly distinctive.

When disguising a voice, recording a "voice over" by another person is usually more effective than technically induced distortion or manipulation of voice pitch – both of which can be reversed. Audiences should be told if the voice is not that of the contributor. Whilst programme makers sometimes find that replacing a voice in this way can reduce the emotional impact, this loss should be weighed against the level of anonymity promised.

We should remember that whilst the story we are producing may be intended for transmission or publication on a particular ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ outlet or outlets, the story may well be transmitted or reproduced globally on other outlets without our knowledge or consent. We should always consider the safety of contributors or sources whose identity may be inadvertently revealed internationally, in all media, in perpetuity.

Jigsaw Identification

Care should be taken not to reveal several pieces of information in words or images that could compromise a person’s anonymity when put together: so-called "jigsaw identification".

This may require care in the way a contributor is described, blurring house numbers, editing out certain pieces of information (whether spoken by the contributor or others), and taking care not to reveal the precise location of a contributor’s home.

Avoiding the jigsaw effect may also necessitate scrutiny of other media as well as our own, to ensure that when the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ publishes certain facts, and another media organisation releases others, these reports, taken together, do not reveal identity.

Even if details have already been placed in the public domain on other radio, TV and internet news outlets, editors need to check that if used together in an item, they do not compromise a person’s anonymity. The item may need to contain fewer details or no new information of its own to avoid this.

We should take particular care across the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ’s news outlets. For instance, a web editor for bbc.co.uk might use someone’s age and the town that he lives near. But the news editor of the 6 o’clock bulletin on ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ One might opt to leave out his age, but name the small village he lived in unless there was close liaison between the two editors. Putting the two stories together could complete the jigsaw.

Guarantees to Contributors relating to Anonymity

When we grant anonymity it is important that the contributor is given sufficient information to be able to understand in advance what steps we propose to take, including the degree of protection that will result from any steps taken.

It should not be assumed that a contributor will necessarily appreciate the fine distinction between not identifying them in ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ content and making sure they are not identifiable. We should judge the sensitivity of the particular circumstances when considering what level of protection is appropriate to protect a contributor’s identity.

To reduce the possibility of any subsequent misunderstanding, we should ensure that contributors understand exactly how their voice and/or image will be disguised (eg by using an actor’s voice, by blurring, pixilation or silhouetting.

For further details on anonymity in The Editorial Guidelines see Section 6 Fairness 6.4.31-36.