Tabloid journalism can cause severe and lasting harm to individuals through deceptive sting operations, as demonstrated by the 2013 case where singer Tulisa Contostavlos was manipulated into facing drug charges by undercover journalist Mazher Mahmood, who was later convicted of perverting the course of justice. Despite the case collapsing and Tulisa being fully cleared, the damage to her career and mental health was irreversible. This case highlights the critical need for an independent press regulator, as current self-regulation through IPSO (Independent Press Standards Organization) is ineffective, with only 1% of complaints reaching resolution and zero findings since 2014. Unlike broadcast television regulated by Ofcom, newspapers lack independent oversight, creating an uneven regulatory landscape that fails to protect individuals from press misconduct.
Deep Dive
Prerequisite Knowledge
- No data available.
Where to go next
- No data available.
Deep Dive
Exclusive: Tulisa tells shocking story of tabloid drug sting
Added:Former X Factor judge and N-Dubz singer Tulisa is calling for the British press to be held to account uh through the introduction of an independent regulator.
>> This all stems back in 2013. Tulisa was the target of a tabloid sting which saw her possibly face trial for drugs charges, but the case was eventually dropped because the undercover journalist, Mazher Mahmood, was found to have lied. He was later convicted of perverting the course of justice.
>> But Tulisa said the damage to her career had been done. She joins us now. It's over a decade ago, but I bet for you this is like like yesterday in terms of the trauma of that time.
>> Not necessarily. I I'm in quite a healed place at the moment, which is why I'm able to do something like this and start this campaign. It's about turning pain and lemons into lemon cake, giving it some meaning and purpose behind all that chaos.
>> Can you remind viewers what happened to you back in 2013 because it's quite complicated?
>> Yes.
>> Um but you will remember it very clearly.
>> Yeah, I mean, obviously it's old news, but for context's sake, um I was set up by a group of journalists over a period of about 6 months, made to believe that I had a 3 and 1/2 million pound movie role up for grabs, and I was essentially manipulated over a long period of time and really extreme measures into eventually handing over a telephone number of someone who wasn't even actually a drug dealer, and they ended up ordering uh through him 800 pounds worth of cocaine, and be- next thing I knew, I was facing 8 years in prison for concern in the selling of class A drugs, a situation that would never have happened if it wasn't created by those journalists.
>> So, the News of the World, wasn't it?
>> Uh in in Mazher Mahmood and uh the Sun on Sunday.
>> Oh, oh, the Sun on Sunday, not the News of the World.
>> I think so. Yeah, I think so. Yeah.
>> I apologize. News of the World.
>> That's how healed I am. I'm having to go back into the details digging in my mind. So >> That's very interesting. So, let's go back to the offer of the movie role. So, when you're told we we want to interview you for a movie role >> Yeah.
>> you now know that there was never a movie and never a role.
>> There was never a movie role. Um I think the main thing that tipped me over the edge is there was a a lady that was the assistant of the producer of Maz Azam Mahmood. And while they were recording me, this lady was constantly bringing me aside off uh the hidden cameras, off the recordings. And she was, you know, telling me things like, "Oh, you've had such a horrible past and your upbringing with your mom was so terrible. And I have such a soft spot for you. I just really want you to get this movie role. But you have to go out there and pretend to be the bad girl in the role. Otherwise, he's not going to give it to you." So, you hear the difference of me, you know, saying, "Oh, yeah, I used to be a little bit rough around the edges when I was younger." to then talking about, "Oh, I was in a gang and drugs and this and that." and really upping the ante. But there was no context when it was printed of the things I was being told and pulled aside and told to go out and say, "There's 3 and 1/2 million pounds on the table."
You know, of course I can sit there and talk a bit of nonsense.
>> So, when people are watching and they think, "Well, why did you even say that?" You're saying as an actor, sometimes there's a sort of level of method acting even in an interview for a role. And that's what you thought you thought it was like an ongoing audition.
>> I also believed that I could nail the role. I believed I could deliver on it.
So, I thought, "What's a few porkies?"
If I'm going to get it, if I make out, you know, that I've done more than I have or I'm worse than I am, as long as I deliver on the role, you know, what's what's a couple of porkies?
>> And was all this being recorded?
>> all being recorded. And obviously, when it was um shown to the world, there was no context behind it or that I'd been set up or the manipulation. It was just Talisa's been caught saying this and that and then that's how I was portrayed for the whole 2 years running up to the trial before it ended and I was advised not to speak out to say anything. So I just sat there for 2 years being public enemy number one.
>> doctored your transcript, didn't they, to take out things you said which didn't fit their story in particular >> Yeah. I mean I think the the sting itself wouldn't have been valid if they had evidence to prove that I was anti-drugs and they had this evidence and they hid it because in one of the car journeys I was being recorded and I had a very anti-drugs conversation where I was like I hate drugs and I hate what it's done to a family member of mine and I was really upset about it and the driver initially told the truth to the police and then Mamdouh told him to change his statement which he did and said oh it wasn't her saying that. It was her friend that said that. But then during the first week at court he had a I guess a guilty conscience and he Alan Smith he came forward and told the truth and said she did have this anti-drugs conversation. Mamdouh did tell me to change my statement and put himself on the line essentially which I'm really really grateful for.
>> the case collapsed because Mamdouh was found to have um >> of the course of justice.
>> You want to change the way the press is regulated. Now, I would wonder whether and I'll I'll give you the spokesperson from IPSO.
>> Mhm.
>> I would wonder whether actually the press has changed significantly because of course after phone hacking and the Leveson inquiry, there were huge changes in the way that the press operates and the way that the press is regulated. Um a spokesperson from IPSO which is the independent press standards organization that the 2012 Leveson report they say endorsed the idea of continued self-regulation of the press and includes funding by the industry. There are new safeguards in place from 2014 and to protect independence, new powers to tackle serious and systemic standards breaches.
Um our privacy notice service can protect privacy and is widely observed by news organizations, whether the Ipso regulated or not.
Huge strides in regulation.
>> Just going back to the first thing you said, which is Ipso is independent. Ipso isn't independent of the press because it is funded and run by the press itself. So, the press are essentially regulating themselves.
>> But don't you think that they should pay?
I mean, otherwise, where does the funding come from?
>> I mean, it's it's really coming down to ethics.
It's like the press is one of the biggest corporations in the world. They, you know, they essentially run our politics.
It's that little voice in the back of our mind, whether it's, you know, vote for this prime minister. And they have unlimited power. And if they step out of line in any way, the only person that's there to pull them up on it is themselves, which to me, any massive, powerful corporation with that much power is just unheard of to be unchecked. Our food is regulated. The TV that I'm on right now is regulated by Ofcom. I don't understand why there's such a big fear around simply regulation. All I All I would ask for is fairness and the truth.
And if someone isn't telling the truth, for them to be pulled up on it.
>> The other change in the last 10 years, though, I mean, you're totally right.
The broadcast television is government regulated through Ofcom. One change in the last 10 years has been that newspapers have become much less influential. They sell much fewer copy copies, far more stuff on social media.
But let's be honest, there's no regulation at all. Is the priority for you really newspapers, or actually isn't social media where it all happens now?
>> Well, you would think so, but as far as I'm concerned, it all starts with a press story. The social media rolls off the back of a press story. So, it's still stemming from the press. Even if, you know, there's a story and 90% of the people that see it are on socials, it started from that press story and then the social media is following suit.
>> I see what you mean, but I also get Ed's point, which is there is zero regulation. If an individual who has no independent regulator wants to take their phone and film you doing something and putting that on a social media site, I think the press tabloid reporters would say, "Well, at least we've got ethics, we've got rules. Someone was taken to court for your case. There is a regulator."
>> Yeah.
>> But you but you still want change. You want Leveson 2.
>> Well, I I just want fair regulation. And And if you're looking at stats, 1% of complaints actually go somewhere with IPSO. And there has been zero finding since 2014.
And they are essentially regulating themselves. When I look at those figures and I look at the situation, for me, something doesn't smell right. I think anyone with any sense would look at those figures and go, "Hmm, so- something's not right here."
>> Tell us about you. You described the the fact that your life now is sensational.
I expect that isn't a word that you imagined you could use back in 2013 because you were really in a very dark place.
>> Yes.
>> Weren't you? So, just tell us where you're at this morning and what you're doing.
>> Um I'm in a really good place. I've been on a very uh self-explorative journey, especially over the last year, doing a lot of healing, a lot of traveling, um doing the inner work, so to speak.
>> Good.
>> It's great to see you.
>> Thank you so much for having me on.
>> I have a petition out right now? It's on my Instagram and on my stories and in my bio. So, please help press regulation, independent press regulation.
>> Thank you so much.
Related Videos

Session 5: Law, Genomic Medicine & Health Equity Conference/Webcast -- Dr. Consuelo Wilkins
UMNconsortium
234 views•2019-01-02

Consider This: ICJ Climate Ruling — Holding Nations to Account
astroawani
307 views•2025-08-11

The Third Gender I Legal Recognition of Intersex Community
KBCChannel1News
259 views•2023-07-09

What Are Proceedings In Court? - CountyOffice.org
CountyOfficeLaw
129 views•2025-03-06

Understanding the EU Electronic Evidence Package | Interview with Cristos Velasco | EP 7
DejanKosutic
816 views•2025-04-22

8 Violations in ONE Day? Judge West Gives Ultimate Wake-Up Call
LawAndLogicTV
263 views•2026-04-26

United States v. Navajo Nation Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained
QuimbeeDotCom
589 views•2023-09-21

Young Professionals: CPR Part 36 Offers with Harry Dyson
kingschambers4859
902 views•2024-04-30
Trending

WOW! Judge TURNS THE TABLES on Trump in His OWN $10B LAWSUIT!!!
MeidasTouch
197K views•2026-07-23

Playstation NO DISC/NO BUY Fight Is Over...
DavidJaffeGames
4K views•2026-07-23

Steam and Xbox Just Dropped The Hammer On PlayStation
OhNoItsAlexx
9K views•2026-07-23

Americans Confused in Australia for 17 Minutes Straight
IWrocker
17K views•2026-07-23