<% ballot="41011" ' Check nothing is broken broken = 0 if ballot = "" then broken = 1 end if set vt = Server.Createobject("mps.Vote") openresult = vt.Open("Vote", "sa", "") ' Created object? if IsObject(vt) = TRUE then ' Opened db? if openresult = True AND broken = 0 then ballotresult = vt.SetBallotName(ballot) ' read the vote votetotal=(vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "yes")+vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "no")) if votetotal <> 0 then ' there are votes in the database numberyes = vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "yes") numberno = vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "no") percentyes = Int((numberyes/votetotal)*100) percentno = 100 - percentyes ' fix graph so funny graph heights dont appear 'if percentyes = 0 then ' percentyes = 1 'end if 'if percentno = 0 then ' percentno = 1 'end if else ' summut went wrong frig it numberyes = 0 numberno = 0 percentyes = 50 percentno = 50 end if end if end if %> Votes so far:

100% 0%			>		>
			Yes: <% =percentyes %>%		No: <% =percentno %>%

As long as the public has an appetite for this type of coverage, the press will continue to hunt celebrities down for the stories. The press doesn't care about moral obligations. They only care about the money their papers make.
Jillianne Reinseth, USA

We, killed Princess Di, with all the dollers we plunked down for any rag that would print any hot photo or story. As long as some one will buy it they will sell it.
Kathleen, U.S.A.

Let us hope that they continue snooping on those who have made their fortune by manipulating the media.
Bertrum Castille, UK

I don't think they will stop snooping. Why would they? There are too many of their readers who would never let them. Even if they did stop there would be others to take their place. The problem lies deeper than just newspapers. It is rooted in the public's voracious appetite for news, which often borders on gossip.
Colijn Ming, Canada

If the media did not force feed us this rubbish then "public demand' would wane. The human race is by nature a curious species. Nothing justifies some of the actions taken by media around the world in the excuse of getting a scoop. Sure let us know about news - not gossip.
Simone French, New Zealand

I don't think that they're going to stop until another person of importance is killed. They're like vultures.
Barb Stewart, USA

It is too late to turn back now and there is no way to regulate it, as long as we can hide behind the freedom of speech. It even protects liars,and mores the pity.
Jeannie McDaniel, US

As long as there are simple readers there will always be simpletons writing what these people want to read. Journalism is not honest like it was and still should be.
Eloise Western, USA

Newspapers need news.
Powce,Malaysia

I believe that as the media plays the role of creating the celebrities they should also take the responsibility of protecting their privacy. So they should not intervene over a certain point.
Abdullah, Bangladesh

The press are the only form of tourture that seems to be tolerated...the press destroy lives and even influence public opinions to believe things about people or groups of people which are not true. I believe that it is largely thanks to the press that the gay community is not accepted throughout the world.
Steven Dryden, USA

Snooping is the stock in trade of the media. So long as it is absolutely truthful and significant, who should deny a reporter of simply carrying out his reason for being? One who frequently is less than truthful, or whose personal agenda distorts the picture will soon be recognized for what he is.
John H Stanley, USA

While uneducated louts can "earn" 5 figure amounts by taking unauthorised photos of individuals you may well expect this type of "business" to continue. It is an invasion of an individual's privacy and should be recognised as such by the police and the courts. If there is such a law as "waiting and besetting" to prevent a husband from making contact with an estranged wife, why can a photographer be free to wait and beset upon a celebrity with impunity ? The freedom of the Press is one thing, the freedom of an individual to enjoy privacy is, in my opinion, inviolate.
J.G. Pierpoint,Canada

Snooping and Investigative journalism are quite close and difficult to be distinguished. If newsmen are legally barred from snooping, products of investigative journalism will decline because many corrupt governments and their officials will go hiding behind this law. We will get no more WaterGate or WhiteWater stories then. The whole community of printing press has been unfairly blamed for a group of blacksheep paparazzi who grossly violated the norms, values, and ethics of journalism in order to make money out of Diana's individual beauty and fame. Therefore, their actions should be handled separately from the rest of printing press community which follow good old traditional and ethical investigative journalism. Longlive Freedom of the Press.
Kyaw Kyaw Htut, Burma

There should be a limit as to how CLOSE a photographer can get to the person, and any infringement should be SEVERELY penalized to stop the frenzy of crowding their victims to the point of, as in Diana's case, to cause her death in the driver's attempt to escape them. There certainly should be a law against making unfounded slanderous news stories about anyone which causes their reputation to be ruined and their families to suffer. Every newspaper should be able to prove the source of the information and if NOT...should also be severely penalized to prevent that particular paper from ever printing another lie.
Joyce Gibbons, USA

The press has too much to lose by raising their moral standards to exclude intrusion into the private lives of public figures.
Keshav, India

The celebrities use the press to boost their reputation. Snooping will never stop and I will support snooping if it is in the interest of the public and if it will show us a true picture of hypocrites.
A Akinyele, United Kingdom

I notice that this page by the BBC refer to newspapers and not to TV cameras which by the way have longer lenses as standard than most stills photographers carry. Further, The code of conduct was agreed by newspapers editors not the TV editorsdo they think they are above such things or are they going to carry on as normal with their 'holier than thou' The Press (and TV cameras) were not resposible for the death of Diana, Dodi and Henri Paul. Henri Paul was. He drove beyond his capabilities.
Steve King, England

As long as public interest creates a financially viable market the media will continue to remain intrusive into the lives of public figures. That's a fact although this does not necessarily make the action correct. Unfortunately as long as money remains the priority for the media these activities will not be deterred. There may be a slight moratorium as far as the royal children, but this too will soon subside.
Pam Gibson, USA

The people who brought the papers with the pictures of Diana are to blame. YOU AND ME! The public buys the papers; Stop feeling sorry for yourself Britain,WE ALL KILLED Diana.
Peter Williams, UK

I don't see why harmless photographing should cause so much furor. With our technology growing so fast and the zooming devices it would be near impossible to keep the press out. We need to learn to live with the press. It becomes a big issue when we are living a double life. Transparency never has to fear any onlookers. Publicity is a blessing and should not be shunned.
Reverend M P Kody, Malaysia

The responsibility for good journalism resides in the consumer of the product. It is up to each individual to "vote" with the purchase of their news source. There will always be people who enjoy reading "snoop" reports as well as those who prefer more serious stories.
R Michael Ditto, USA

As long as there are readers who crave the sort of coverage that the tabloids provide, they will do so-no matter what the consequences or damage they cause. Diana's death was preventable if the press had not been so maddened by the lure of fast money for a picture, and an insatiable need by the public for every single picture of her no matter what the circumstances.
Mary Hilton, USA

When the press interfers to a poind of harrassement, then it is time do stop the press. If the press cannot be self inforcing than some one must do it for them.
Marcie Adams, USA

In my opinion, the ban will not last. Newspapers and editors will heed the ban to begin with, but as soon as the public begun to forget Diana and the tradegy newspapers will become more intrusive AGAIN. It's the nature of the business!
Kirste Bridger, Canada

Let's be clear about this. The newspapers supply nothing that the public doesn't ask for. Diana's image is still making money for a lot of people but that wouldn't be possible if the sad sycophantic market wasn't there already.
John Luby, Scotland

Seeing as how the codes are only being voluntarily observed by the newspapers, I don't see the ban lasting. Past experience has shown that as soon as newspaper editors smell a story that will sell their papers, they'll suddenly find ways of justifying the subject as being in the public interest.
Paul Hiker, Leatherhead, UK

As far as I can see the general public killed Diana. If everyone is so outraged at newspapers snooping into private affairs, why don't they just stop buying them. Publishers are simply giving the public what they want and if it sells their papers they'll go on snooping.
Alison J Cohen, USA

I agree with above comment with Alison Cohen. As long as sensational stories sell newspapers, (and they do), the public who buy sensationalism, must bear some responsibility for the need of public figures to be involved in high speed car chases, while attempting to evade newshounds. No amount of legislation is ever going to stop people from satisfying their thirst for ''gossip''.
Frank Mallaghan, Spain

The only thing editors and owners of newspapers care about is circulation. Any story that the editors believe will improve their circulation will be published, regardless of anything the PCC might believe. The only form of regulation that works is refusing to buy the newspapers. All the current published evidence suggests that newspaper photographers and journalists only had a circumstancial contribution to the death of the Princess. I believe we should stop blaming the press for the accident, even though their behaviour was and remains reprehensible.
David Mair, Reading, UK

It's the media's job to snoop. In the US we have strong First Amendment Rights which protect the Press. There will always be tat in the media and it's hypocrisy on the one hand for people to complain and on the other buy newspapers full of tat. It's interesting to note that the newspapers with the greatest amount of tat have the highest circulation. Beware of Princess Diana's death being used to restrict the freedom of the Press.
J Mcinespie, USA

Who killed Diana is a vicious circle. Had the media not printed about Diana, then the public would not have been able to 'poke' their nose into Diana's life. At the same time, had the public not been so fiercely interested in Diana, then no matter what the media printed, their low 'juicy' sales would have forced them to stop printing such intrusive material anyway. How many of us have actually STOPPED reading about Diana since her death?
Supreet Dhiman, UK

Back to top | BBC News Home | BBC Homepage	©