– It is completely in borderland, it balances completely on the border, says PFU head Anne Weider Aasen. The Press Professional Committee (PFU) will consider a complaint from Durek Verrett against Se og Hør on Wednesday morning. The complaint concerned a ten-page spread in the weekly newspaper from 17 December last year, in which Verret’s state of health and illness were discussed. Verrett himself did not participate in the case and declined when Se og Hør approached him on the streets of Los Angeles to ask for an interview. Now the PFU has chosen to let Se og Hør go free, and thus does not support Verrett in the complaint. Demanding case During the discussion of the case, several of the PFU members expressed that it was a demanding case to come to a decision in. – If this had been an influenza or someone else, it would have been a felling. But as a person who to that extent exposes himself and his own health as a business model, he has to wait for the spotlight to be put on his health. But it would not have been inside if it had been any other person, says Gunnar Kagge, as a representative from the journalists and employed at Aftenposten. Via lawyer Kyrre Eggen, Durek wrote in his complaint to the PFU that: “Durek Verrett rejected the request and stated that he did not want any publicity or publicity about his illness, which he wanted to keep private. Despite this, Se og Hør published a massive report, on the cover of the magazine and over 10 pages in the magazine, about Durek Verett’s disease.” Se og Hør, for its part, has denied that they have breached good press etiquette. They refer, among other things, to the fact that Verrett has been open about illness on other occasions in the past, including in 2012. HEALTH BUSINESS: PFU believes that the fact that Verrett has made its health part of its commercial business is an important factor in allowing Se og Hør go free Photo: Norsk Presseforbund Shaman activities and allegations – It is precisely his work that is leaking, and that he commercialises on weak groups which gives good reason to put a critical spotlight on him, even if it is demanding for complaints. It is private, and I understand that he reacts to the way it is done, it is detailed with pictures to and from the hospital and information about which days he is there. And other things in his life that may not be perceived as relevant, says PFU leader Weider Aasen. They refer in particular to point 4.3 of the Be Careful Poster, which says that people must be respected for their privacy. Stein Bjøntegård, who represents the editors’ association and news, believes that the list should be very high in order to disclose such health information. – Then on the other side I have his shaman activities, and the claims that he can cure himself and others, he says. In the discussion round, Bjøntegård asks himself whether the health information to Verrett is of great enough public interest for it to be relevant to write about. The conclusion is nevertheless that the PFU has not breached good press etiquette. – This does not open the way for a change in the PFU’s view on what private health information should be passed on. It must be made clear that this is an exceptional case, says Bjøntegård. Kagge believes that Se og Hør documents well that he uses his own health when he markets himself. – Then I think it is completely legitimate for the press to go in and investigate whether it is actually true, he says.
ttn-69
– Very demanding case – news Culture and entertainment
