The M.E.N says it broke this story, and the police watchdog investigation relates to footage they later obtained, providing critical context to the violence against the backdrop at the time last year of growing civil unrest. According to the publisher, it shows the moments leading up to the incident in more detail - involving two men, a male police officer and two female officers.
Sarah Lester’s op-ed reads as follows:
Don't criminalise the truth
Through my many years in journalism I've learned this: the truth rarely comes easy. It's almost always brought into the light by someone willing to take risks and do what's right.
People like the doctors who spoke out during the pandemic, the person who told us about the appalling conditions that led to Awaab Ishak’s death - a two-year-old boy who died from exposure to mould in his home. The brave individuals who exposed the Post Office scandal.
Journalism depends on these people, individuals who step forward, often at great personal risk, because they believe the public has a right to know. And they believe that by exposing a truth something important will change.
Just over a year ago, we published footage of a violent incident at Manchester Airport. It showed a police officer kicking a man in the head as he lay on the ground.
The footage went viral. Protests erupted in Rochdale. Roads and tram lines were blocked outside Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham's offices.
At the Manchester Evening News, we obtained additional CCTV footage that showed what happened in the lead-up to that moment. It gave critical context.
After a careful process of verification and intense internal debate, we published it. We did so because we believed, and still believe, that in a democracy, the public deserves the full picture.
The protests stopped overnight.
Many senior figures in Manchester, including within the police, told us they were relieved, even grateful, that we had published it.
A man has since been convicted of assaulting a member of the public and two police officers. Legal proceedings are ongoing, so I cannot say much more.
But last night, Channel 4 News revealed something deeply disturbing: a Greater Manchester Police officer is now under criminal investigation by the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), following an allegation that they leaked the footage to us.
This is a truly chilling moment.
In August and September 2024, the IOPC contacted the Manchester Evening News, asking us to hand over the CCTV and identify our source. We refused.
The protection of sources is not optional. It is a cornerstone of journalism.
Under the Editors' Code of Practice, enforced by the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO), it is a moral - and professional - obligation.
People who speak to us sometimes take enormous personal risks to shine a light on important issues. We are duty-bound to protect them.
We do not know the identity of the person being investigated and we make no comment on them or the investigation.
But we do ask: what public interest is being served by pursuing this individual? How much taxpayer money is being spent on this - while the justice system groans under the weight of backlogs and delays? What message does this send to others who might be considering speaking up?
This is a bad decision.
I've been around long enough to remember when the Manchester Evening News named the man suspected of planting the IRA bomb in Manchester. The evidence was strong, but the investigation was shelved perhaps under political pressure amid the Northern Irish peace process.
The only person who ended up in court was a police officer, accused and ultimately cleared of leaking information.
It's hard to believe we're repeating the same mistake.
I'm proud to be the editor of the Manchester Evening News. Every day I see the profound impact our investigations, campaigns and day-to-day reporting have on the communities we serve. We published the airport video with the best intentions and believe the individual who shared it did so for the right reasons.
When the Manchester Evening News launched in 1868, founding editor Mitchell Henry declared: "In putting ourselves into print, we have no apology to offer, but the assurance of an honest aim to serve the public interest."
Those words remain as true today as they were then, but newspapers cannot serve the public interest without the people who are willing to take a risk to tell the truth.
The IOPC should think hard about whose interest their investigation serves.
Keep up-to-date with publishing news: sign up here for InPubWeekly, our free weekly e-newsletter.
