The Guardian view on section 40: muzzling journalism
Summary
It was thanks to The Guardian's revelations of phone hacking by parts of the tabloid press that led to the Lord Justice Leveson inquiry in 2011. This inquiry looked at the culture, practices and ethics of British press. During this inquiry the judge heard some harrowing testimonies from victims who were mistreated by the press or had their privacy invaded. Leveson clearly thought that the British press was out of control. After the inquiry what we ended up with was a form of press regulation. Newspapers can sign up to a state approved regulator but so far only one has been endorsed and that is called 'Impress' which is hardly a inderpendant regulator when the person who owns it Max Mosley is a wealthy victim of press intrusion into his sex life. So far 'Impress' has proved unpopular as it has failed to gain the interest of any major news outlets. The sanction has been smuggled into section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act. Those that refuse to join a system of regulation would be subjected to a form of unnatural justice: non-cooperative newspapers face paying the legal costs of both sides even in cases they win.
Key Statistics
- Left unopposed, we will get an unequal system of media law that targets a specific type of news organisation, not a specific form of poor conduct. Such malpractice will no doubt feature in the outcome of the 43-month-long independent review into the unsolved murder of the private investigator Daniel Morgan, which involves the police and the media.
- Leveson = Conducted in 2011
My Opinion
I think that the British press has always had some form of regulation in what is published in the form of the editors and chief executives reviewing publications before consumption by us. However, the Leveson inquiry brings a much needed change in that publications are regulated by an independent party because I feel that editors have a bit of a biased view towards what it being published as what is being published can determine the readership success or failure for the organisation.
No comments:
Post a Comment