Conclusion
Although there are arguments for naming and shaming to be stopped, BBC Online's comment about the News of the World printing half-naked teens is slightly misleading. It's not as if they're printing pictures of little kids, against their wishes in some perverse way. The girls in these pictures have chosen to be there, they want to be pictured, whether it be for money, it is still their choice. The News of the World wants to sell papers and the inclusion of this will attract buyers. In addition, this topic is one which is traditionally recognised in the press. It's taken very casually and isn't a big deal. Naming and shaming is and comparing the two is a far-fetched argument.
This idea of wanting to sell papers however, was an issue at the time of the campaign. It was thought that the 'For Sarah' was simply a way of selling papers as "the News of the World has been known to pull stunts for coverage before." (BBC Online, 2000). This is an issue I hate to address but such the world that journalism is it is a possibility. But then if this is the case, what kind of world am I entering myself into? Do I want to be a party to such scandalous ideologies?
…
