Then we move to the usual listings, which will no doubt trigger snorts of derision by those familiar with those sites as some now have CCTV cameras, others barriers, and most have spatial conflicts (for instance with boys racers) which have long rendered them obsolete for doggers. Indeed, one site mentioned is currently a new housing estate. Just because a location might be posted, it does not indicate it is active.
Moreover - and in contrast to cruising and cottaging sites - accurate dogging site information is rarely posted in open forums because of these journalist trawls and the need to protect spaces.
The story about a dogging site 500 yards from a school therefore seems unlikely, and in any case, being 500yards from a school bonking for England at 3am is a rather different proposition to vigorous exploration of your vehicles suspension during mid-morning school break and the handing out of milk and a sports biscuit (there certainly won't be a picture of that leisurely pursuit on their biccy).
The Durham Police spokesman takes a commendably similar approach to Northumbria (in both cases, a thawing in attitudes to traditional quotes) who notes dogging isn't a particular issue for the Force, and that the sites listed aren't 'hot spots'.
Unusually, the story does make reference to the film Dogging: A Love Story, which did use one historic dogging location, but which has long been avoided due to all this publicity, thus making an important point which the paper could make, but instead the newspaper uses it as an example of a comedic take on dogging (they've obviously not seen it - it's a dreadful film).
So yes, a more textured story but still inaccurate about locations and the law. Why, one must then ask, do journalists keep returning to these stories in the absence of any clear justification?
Read the full Sunday Sun piece here.