Media barred from doorstepping Polanski’s family following Mail feud

As we reported, freelance journalist Nicole Lampert has been bothering Zack Polanski’s family.

According to her, she’s been doing so as part of her efforts to conduct what she calls ‘journalism’. Defending herself, Lampert claimed that Polanski’s family went to her. Now, it’s claimed that the Green leader’s family have complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO):

Zack Polanski’s mum, dad, brother, and sister have formally complained to IPSO after journalists turned up at their family homes. But I’m confused. I thought the Daily Mail "journalist" said his family approached her.

— Mukhtar (@I_amMukhtar) April 1, 2026

Standards

We first learned that the gutter press were looking into Polanski’s family via this tweet:

This is why Daily Mail journalists are going after my family now.

The right wing propaganda machine will not work on the Green Party.

We're ready to end Rip Off Britain, end the cost of living crisis and make hope normal again. https://t.co/w9uyGh8mfP

— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) March 28, 2026

We later learned this was being conducted by independent journalist Nicole Lampert on behalf of the Daily Mail. Lampert posted the following online:

I’m a freelance journalist who spoke to your family members who are frightened by the Jew hate in your party. They are frightened by what you have given the green light to.

This is the British media we’re talking about, so the “Jew hate” in question was actually legitimate criticism of the genocidal state of Israel.

The ‘family’ she spoke to ended up being distant relatives. As such, her piece proved nothing besides the fact that everyone has a third cousin or step auntie who’s thick enough to get taken in by the Daily Mail.

Lampert would later say:

I didn’t hound anyone. They came to me.

Since then, the Guido Fawkes blog has reported the following notice which was sent to regulated media organisations:

IPSO has today been contacted by a representative acting on behalf of the immediate family of Zack Polanski.

Mr Polanski’s mother, father, brother, and sister ask that the press do not attend their homes and do not approach them by phone or email, as they do not wish to give comment to the media. For any media enquiries, please contact the Green Party press office at [REDACTED] or on [REDACTED].

We are happy to make editors aware of his request. We note the terms of Clause 2 (Privacy) and 3 (Harassment) of the Editors’ Code.

Notably, this notice doesn’t explicitly confirm that journalists approached members of the Polanski family, nor how.

Polanski has previously claimed they were indeed contacted, though:

Spoke to my family today – all refused to talk to you.

You then started hunting down random "anon" relatives.

People are holding your shit rag accountable.

You've not just "touched a nerve."

You've absolutely spurred on a movement ready to take on the Daily Mail. Congrats. https://t.co/95Oq3SUxAf

— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) March 29, 2026

Form

As people have highlighted, this is far from the only accusation of shoddy journalism that Lampert is currently defending against. The following is Independent reporting from March this year:

Former Daily Mail showbiz editor accused of using private investigators ‘who engaged in unlawful acts’

Nicole Lampert was giving evidence in the trial of claims of unlawful information gathering brought by a group of household names against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL)

As the BBC reported on 3 March:

A former Daily Mail showbusiness editor has denied listening to voicemails between actors Jude Law and Sadie Frost Law and said stories she wrote about their relationship came from an “amazing source”.

Nicole Lampert said the source was close to Frost and that information had been passed to the newspaper through a “trusted freelance journalist”.

Frost spoke about how the stories led to her mistrusting close friends. Now, however, she is convinced her voicemails were hacked.

Speaking about a specific article, the BBC wrote:

One article in October 2004 referred to discussions about a £10m divorce settlement. Law’s solicitors later complained that it was wrong to suggest he had accepted the settlement, and the Daily Mail published an apology.

Sherborne suggested the newspaper had been unable to challenge the complaint because the information had been obtained through phone hacking and the true source could not be revealed. Lampert rejected the claim.

Responding to an article in which the Mail reported on Frost’s sleeping pill prescription, Lampert said:

We wouldn’t ever report that sort of information now, but that was par for the course then.

It makes you wonder what villainous acts are simply “par for the course” today.

Featured image Barold