This is page 1 of 1 (This thread has 439 messages.)
MN WEBCHAT GUIDELINES 1. One question per member plus a follow-up question if appropriate, ie once you've had a response. 2. Keep your question brief 3. Don't be disappointed if your specific question doesn't get answered and do try not to keep posting "What about me?". 4. Do be civil/polite. See guidelines in full here.
Live webchat with Hugh Grant (!!!) about the Leveson report and press reform, Monday 10 December, 8pm
(439 Posts)
Please click the 'Recommend' button below to confirm that you would like to post this thread to your facebook wall:
If you do not wish to post this thread to facebook, close this window.
If you have previously recommended this thread, you should see a tick / check mark on the recommend button. Click the tick to undo the recommendation (the tick may appear to change to a cross as you do this.) If you added a comment with your recommendation, you will need to delete that from your facebook wall separately.
We're delighted to announce that sleb-actor-turned-campaigner Hugh Grant (yes it's Hugh ) is joining us for a webchat tonight, Monday, December 10 at 8pm.
Hugh keen to talk to us about the Leveson report and press reform. As you probably know he's been a prominent member of Hacked Off, and before that was best known for his quintessential English gent roles in movies such as Four Weddings and a Funeral and Love Actually.
Hacked Off is an alliance of victims of press abuse, journalists, academics, lawyers and others who successfully campaigned for a public inquiry into the phone hacking scandal.
And now that the inquiry's been held (by Lord Leveson), Hacked Off wants all Leveson's recommendations for press reform implemented.
(This webchat is focused on Leveson, so we hope you'll understand that Hugh will prioritising Qs about that ahead of Qs about his career/personal life/choice of biscuits - although, if there's time, he will do his best to address a few of those too.)
So, join us and Hugh, online at 8pm tonight. If you can't make it then, you can post up advance questions on this thread.
I really enjoyed watching your good self on News Night (almost as much as Justine ). <<waves at hovering Justine>>
Despite the fact you can clearly hold your own, and are able to debate intelligently and very well, do you think people try and represent you as the 'sleb spoke person, rather than an advocate for a very important issue? Do you think the media will continue to think people who, to an extent, choose to be in the limelight are fair game, (like the Duchess of Cambridge and those photos for example) whilst making sympathetic noises for people such as Milly Dowlers parents?
Since your involvement with Hacked Off have you noticed any difference in the way the paps + press treat you? Do they hold back or are they more aggressive?
OK, I've had a think (!) and this is my question - Hugh, welcome! Fantastic to have you here talking about this issue. My question is on the media response to the Leveson report - it's clear (to me) that Cameron has weighed up the potential fall out from backing the report in full, when faced with the 'backlash' that would follow from the printed press, and back-tracked from the intitial 'if the recommendations aren't bonkers, I'll back it' to 'lets not be hasty...rubicon...blah' stance - in light of this, do you think there is a realistic chance of the recommendations being implemented when the media still have such a huge influence over those who would be/should be responsible for pushing the recommendations through parliament? Are there any compromises that you/Hacked Off would deem acceptable to get the bulk of the recommendations through i.e. is there any part of the report recommendations that would be acceptable to be implemented at the expense of other recommendations?
Also, given the media focus on Hacked Off, and those who back the campaign i.e. who are they, where is the funding coming from? - do you, or Hacked Off, have any plans to show some more transparency on that point, to address that 'concern' from the media?
Also just wanted to add my 'well done'. I've seen you talk (a lot) very passionately, and it's nice to see someone willing to make a stand, and stand up for EVERYONE.
I have always thought 'slebs who actively 'court' the media should be differentiated from the professional actors etc who try to keep their private life away from the media.
Do you think if the media had two different levels of reporting for the two different types of celebrity, it would help to distinguish in the publics minds who is an actually being hounded and those who set it up themselves?
I.e. if PA has an article about some drivel, the public would then know he's opted into that type of relationship with the media. So know to accept it as chip paper but if someone like yourself is subject of the same type of 'oh look he's walked from a car to a shop' article the public then know you didn't ask for any type of commentary about your life and we should be avoiding those articles/complaining, feeling socially uncomfortable with the intrusion.
Hello. You were great at the Leveson inquiry. Firstly, Well done for speaking up on behalf of those who don't have a voice. Just after you gave evidence the Daily Mail wrote a pretty scathing response to your comments about them, which, if I remember correctly, Leveson was not very pleased about.
Do you feel that since then their coverage of you has been more or less positive? Or don't you care?
Do you think that it will be possible to persuade Cameron to change his mind about his complete betrayal of the people you have been representing refusal to even consider some of Leveson's proposals? Is he motivated by the desire for positive press coverage? And what do you think of the proposed bill Milliband has put forward today?
Sorry, lots of questions there. Ignore as many as you like
Sorry, I know I'm breaking the guidelines by asking another question. But do you think the web news and social media, blogs, forums etc, should be subject to the same scrutiny and regulations as the press or would this be unworkable in practice?
Leveson agreed that the press "apply a demeaning and sexualizing lens" to women. Personally I think The Sport should be placed on the top shelf along with the rest of the porn and that ppl who take non-consensual 'upskirt' shots, (possibly along with anyone who describes a 4 yr old as "cavorting provocatively in a tiny pink swimsuit"), should be placed on the sex offenders register.
What do you think can practicably be done about issues like these and do you think media sexism is likely to change because of Leveson?
Reform of the press is very badly needed, they seem to think that it's OK to snoop into the lives of others at will. Surely the human rights act (home and family life) should come into play here (not a question, just a thought)? Do you agree with the findings of the Leveson inquiry?
Would you like to come and join us for Christmas lunch? Roast goose?
Celebrities obviously rely on the media to a large extent for publicity (some more so than others ), how do think celebrities can achieve that balance between a reasonable level of publicity versus obvious press intrusion?
I dislike the celeb obsessed culture at the moment. It's too much, and the important news is not reported on. But apparently the public wants to read about X Factor, Towie, Strictly et al, so I don't see this changing anytime soon.. I read The Independent, which I think is the best paper for unbiased actual news reports.
I thought the media went totally overboard on their Royal baby coverage last week, and it was the coverage of the prank that did the harm.
Best of luck with your campaign. I've already signed the petition.
The Leveson inquiry was concerned that press and police relations had become unhealthily close; are you concerned that the election of police commissioners, who will necessarily be obliged to court media publicity for their election campaigns, will exacerbate this issue in the future?
Do you think that maintaining freedom of the press is axiomatic to proper control of the rule of law or that a legislated control of the press can work? Might we not be creating a monster of a different sort for the future?
I think Dacre did your cause a favour. Leveson listened to your evidence and then witnessed Dacre trashing you. It made it all a bit more real for our Brian.
Brian Cathcart, Tom Watson and yourself should be knighted for your wonderful campaigning work re Press Abuses!
What about the burglaries allegedly commissioned by newspapers through third parties - are the police investigating these? And what of those who might seem to have lied under oath at Leveson (mentioning no names, but the evidence of a former Daily Mirror editor seemed to be at odds with material contained his book AND with the evidence of Jeremy Paxman) - should they face further action?
We can all see that David Cameron has reneged on his promise to implement the Leveson proposals and we can all guess WHY he has reneged, so please keep up the pressure! Cameron is done for either way = either the press will punish him or the electorate will.
And what of those who might seem to have lied under oath at Leveson (mentioning no names, but the evidence of a former Daily Mirror editor seemed to be at odds with material contained his book AND with the evidence of Jeremy Paxman) - should they face further action?
And Charlotte Church's footage of <cough> a former Daily Mirror editor talking about this issue, as shown in Hugh's recent documentary leading up to the publishing of Leveson's report.
Why is it taking Cameron so long to do something when clearly a lot of money was spent on the Leveson Inquiry and the conclusion seems fair? Plus he said himself things need to change! Does he not understand that the public thinks it's about time things changed? btw you're a great actor! And what you've done with the Hacked Off Campagne is great, just hope things get sorted out soon.
Hi. I would really like to know where you feel the public interest line is drawn when it comes to personal lives? For example, you are an actor who doesn't splurge sell your life to the press\magazines. At what point would you feel it was ok for a private life story to be revealed? (Ie if you had a certain image, and didn't live up to it in reality?) Also, is it ever really okay to suggest that people are fair game - has chantelle (from CBB) for example, lost rights to privacy by selling her bad relationship stories (by writing a column about it all) My own view is no and no - I can easily accept a film etc for what it is without assuming the actor is the same in real life. I also buy the Independent and tutted at the coverage of Kate's pregnancy as unnecessary.
Hello Hugh and thank you for visiting us here. Well done on all your work with Hacked Off (and the rest of the team)!
My question is, given that the govt are likely to wriggle out of any actual press legislation (legal underpinning) giving future possible misuse of any rules as their reasoning, do you think there is a compromise which can be reached here? Otherwise Leveson would seem to have been a wasted activity. Which would be really sad.
Hi Hugh. I too hate the celebrity culture the way it is today. And think it is absolutely ridiculous, unnecessary and damaging. But i would like to ask you this. What is your opinion on the way people like Dacre and his "newspaper" and other publications who persecute not only yourselves but the people who cant fight back ,either because they cant afford to or are simply too ill. Because of their hate stories towards disabled people on benefits like DLA and ESA disability hate crime is on the rise. I think this was discussed at Leveson but only briefly. I believe there is a link between the hate stories and the way disabled and ill people are now being targeted. They run stories saying that "75% of people are faking it" but the actual figure from the DWP on DLA on this is 0.5% That includes both fraud and error. There is also the way they love to paint the picture of unemployed people as scroungers. They seem to ignore the fact that we are in the biggest recession in living memory. The unemployed are another group they demonize that cant afford to fight back. Easy safe targets. And unfortunately certain sections of the public dont recognize propaganda when they see it. Hence the rise in the hate crimes.
I don't know if you are aware, but Maria Miller came on MN for a webchat a couple of weeks ago and gave the most dismal, patronising and frankly pointless set of answers to intelligent questions that I have ever seen.
Will you please carry on speaking out because she still ain't getting it.
Hi Hugh (waves/blows kiss) Do you think that the celebrities who thrive off media attention however negative ; the big brother types etc should have one set of rules as a whole industry has been borne out of their antics? And evryone else be protected?
darkesteyes I literally hate the Dacre lies on benefit 'scroungers' too. I have a company that works with the very long term unemployed.....and the last 3 years of ramping up this rhetoric about the 'underclass' is finally coming to fruition. Benefits are being slashed for totally minor incidents, everyone is presumed a liar and cheat, and genuinely animals get treated better. I am now, at this moment, seeing first hand more people going homeless, considering suicide and certainly forced into crime. Anyone who says the press from the likes of Dacre is harmless fun/ or worse is fact, is simply a wankering fool. It's actually life and death for some people <sounds dramatic and meant to be emoticon>
Hugh, thanks for speaking up about this. I am wondering when was the actual 'right, that's it' moment? You obviously have to deal with press intrusion a lot given your job, but what was the trigger point in this precise case that led you to speak out about it in the way that you did?
Also can I just say that your dance around No 10 in Love Actually is one of the finest cinematic moments I have ever encountered
Do you have an opinion on the current campaign to get The Sun to stop page 3? It's beginning to get some real momentum behind it and I just presumed that you would have been approached by the founder of No More Page 3 for support, just wondering.
Hello Hugh as a former journalist and having seen the evil side of state presss control how do you balance statute protection against government control? I realise that current editors exercise de facto control (I've heard the phone calls Murdoch makes to his editors), but it's scary stuff when you talk about press control. Can't we simply tighten privacy legislation? regards Coorong.
i have tried to sign for hacked off, unfortunately i'm not in the UK at the moment, do i have to give a Uk postcode or will it be available for other countries someday?
Very interested in your responses. Thank you for coming to do a webchat.
Are you campaigning on these issues purely because you were the result of a tabloid sting showing you to use prostitutes while appearing in the media at public functions with your also-famous girlfriend? Do you think that makes your campaign credible or do you worry that people think "oh he only wants press reform so men like him couldn't be busted with prostitutes when they portray themselves in interviews as loving boyfriends"?
I've always wondered whether the questions over your motivation would bother you.
Hugh as a journalist who has worked for tabloids and women's magazines for over 20 years and managed to get real life and celebrity exclusives while abiding by the PCC code, the thing I find most difficult about the Leveson report recommendations and the Hacked Off campaign is the idea that the new code should be enforceable by law. It's really just a small minority of journalists and media owners who have behaved badly, isn't it? Is a law really necessary to control the bad behaviour of the few? And do you have any faith that newspaper editors and media owners are going to abide by the recommendations they've agreed to support?
Do you think that implementation of Leveson as is could ensure that groups as well as individuals can be protected from constant drip-drip demonisation. Especially as some of the rhetoric comes from within the govt.?
What do you think about the Labour party's suggestion of putting the Lord Chief Justice, head of the judiciary in England and Wales, in charge of overseeing a new self-regulatory, rather than a statutory body? BBC story here
i never rated your films, but now i've heard you speak out about and against the revolting way the press have treated individuals, if i was going to perhaps, well not be faithful to Mr Fountain, i'd put you on the list of prospective shagees
What are you advocating for to address the misogyny in the press identified through representations to the inquiry? Do you think this leads to a culture where men feel entitled to pay to use women's bodies?
Sorry, I know I'm breaking the guidelines by asking another question. But do you think the web news and social media, blogs, forums etc, should be subject to the same scrutiny and regulations as the press or would this be unworkable in practice?
I'll shut up now.
Good question. I agree with Leveson on this. That unless the website is big, powerful and commercial it should not be subject to any new regulator. Justine says Mumsnet is very poor and therefore off the hook.
Hi Hugh. I too hate the celebrity culture the way it is today. And think it is absolutely ridiculous, unnecessary and damaging. But i would like to ask you this. What is your opinion on the way people like Dacre and his "newspaper" and other publications who persecute not only yourselves but the people who cant fight back ,either because they cant afford to or are simply too ill. Because of their hate stories towards disabled people on benefits like DLA and ESA disability hate crime is on the rise. I think this was discussed at Leveson but only briefly. I believe there is a link between the hate stories and the way disabled and ill people are now being targeted. They run stories saying that "75% of people are faking it" but the actual figure from the DWP on DLA on this is 0.5% That includes both fraud and error. There is also the way they love to paint the picture of unemployed people as scroungers. They seem to ignore the fact that we are in the biggest recession in living memory. The unemployed are another group they demonize that cant afford to fight back. Easy safe targets. And unfortunately certain sections of the public dont recognize propaganda when they see it. Hence the rise in the hate crimes.
At one point it looked like David Cameron was willing to split up the coalition in order to defend the "freedom of the press" over effective regulation. How disappointing do you find his response? Do you think the extemities of media intrusion and manipulation uncovered by Leveson have fallen on deaf ears?
Rumour has it that the Daily Mail caught Ian Huntly & Maxine Carr after the police in Soham realised that Huntly was well aware of his 'rights' to resist the attempts of the Plods, so local coppers, desperate to find the girls, sent the guy from the Mail to tea at Chateau Ian. DM man bugged their coffee table. The girls were dead (had been for days) but the DM tape did for H&C anyway. Allegedly.
How do you reconcile press regulation for Bad Things and Hurt Feelings with allowing the press to break the rules in a way that delivers important social resilts? You're much too clever to suggest the police should do their job better.
Reform of the press is very badly needed, they seem to think that it's OK to snoop into the lives of others at will. Surely the human rights act (home and family life) should come into play here (not a question, just a thought)? Do you agree with the findings of the Leveson inquiry?
Would you like to come and join us for Christmas lunch? Roast goose?
I'd like to answer both your question. The second one first. Yes, please, I'm rather lonely. As for the first one about the human rights act you're absolutely right that the trick here is to balance article 10 which defends (quite rightly) our right to say what we like against the less discussed article 8 which defends a citizen's rights to a basic expectation of privacy. You tend to hear a lot less about the second one in the papers that the first.
I once knew an editor of a red top and over dinner one night he told me that you could get anything through the legal department if you could find someone who would stand up in court and swear that they believed it to be true. (even if they absolutely knew it wasn't)
where on earth would you start in trying to change that kind of attitude?
If coulson or brooks are found guilty, do you think Cameron or Osborne will lose public face, or should they? I think it's very clear that both are guilty of a staggering lack of judgment especially where coulson is concerned.
If sleazy tabloid journalists were to go through your bin, what kind of biscuit wrappers would they find in there?
They would find a lot of wrappers tomorrow because I spent all day panicking about this question. In the end, I'd have to say, it's very hard to beat a McVitie's plain chocolate digestive, but only eaten in the correct way. I like to lick all the chocolate off and then give the biscuit to the dog. There is no faster way to make a 52-year-old man look two or seven.
hi Hugh, I'd be interested to know where Hacked Off intends to go from now and in what ways the Great British Public can support the campaign. Are there opportunities to further lobby our MPs, newspaper editors/owners etc? As a community activist myself I feel frustrated by how "David & Goliath" this all is, in spite of the obvious inherent unfairness and lack of accountability.
To those of you who asked about Motorman you're right it's an interesting and neglected part of the whole sordid business. For many years, a private investigator called Steve Whittamore blagged and bribed private data on ordinary British citizens including the families of murder victimes, including the little girls murdered at Soham. The information commissioner's report in 2006 ran a league table of the newspapers who hired Steve Whittamore most frequently, top of the list was the Daily Mail.
I like the work you do on Pancreatic cancer too. My dad died of it around the same time as your mum.....and I appreciated you speaking up about it. It's not a cancer that seems to have moved forward in anyway in 50 years. I wish the press would cover important stories like that, but there we go.......we all must know that Kerry Katona has lost a few pounds....then put them back on again.........<face palm>
Did you think it helps for campaigns to have a celebrity backing/driving them, or do you think it distract from the cause? (or rather, do you think the press have ever used your campaign as an excuse to talk about you and not the issue?)
OK, I've had a think (!) and this is my question - Hugh, welcome! Fantastic to have you here talking about this issue. My question is on the media response to the Leveson report - it's clear (to me) that Cameron has weighed up the potential fall out from backing the report in full, when faced with the 'backlash' that would follow from the printed press, and back-tracked from the intitial 'if the recommendations aren't bonkers, I'll back it' to 'lets not be hasty...rubicon...blah' stance - in light of this, do you think there is a realistic chance of the recommendations being implemented when the media still have such a huge influence over those who would be/should be responsible for pushing the recommendations through parliament? Are there any compromises that you/Hacked Off would deem acceptable to get the bulk of the recommendations through i.e. is there any part of the report recommendations that would be acceptable to be implemented at the expense of other recommendations?
Also, given the media focus on Hacked Off, and those who back the campaign i.e. who are they, where is the funding coming from? - do you, or Hacked Off, have any plans to show some more transparency on that point, to address that 'concern' from the media?
Two parts to your question, both interesting. Would Hacked Off compromise on anything Leveson recommends? The truth is that Leveson's report was incredibly mild and he bent over backwards to keep the state at three arms length from the press. So there's no real need, for much compromise.
And thats what makes it all the more astonishing, that the prime minister could have gone back on his word to the victims (I don't include myself - I'm talking about real victims, people like the Dowlers and the McCanns) within hours of the report being published.
Withregards to the finance of Hacked Off, a lot comes from charitable trusts, a lot comes from private donations both big and small and some of those donations are anonymous because of the fear off retribution on the donors from the newspapers. But our total budget is almost certainly far less than what news international pay Clive Goodman and Glen Mulcaire even after they'd been charged, arrested and convicted.
I had visions of Hugh speed typing like an eccentric author, rattling off numerous witty responses, peppered with some serious undertones. Me thinks we are getting some one fingered typing here...
Another fawning jolly well done here - I thought the recent programme was excellent, and throughout this whole circus you have been the voice of sense and reason.
And I don't have a question - just keep fighting the good fight.
You always said that you - when you were little - never want to become an actor. Do you like this 'work' more than acting? - I know I asked this before but I'm actually pretty curious about the answer
It feels like the media is above the law or being the law at the moment - at one extreme the media is flouting the law with phone hacking etc, at the other it is doing its job (I'm thinking about Jimmy Savile and the Exposure documentary - it took ITV to bring his crimes to light.) What is the best way to change this culture so that the law of the land becomes a respected moral code at these elite levels and also capable of doing its job without the media having to do it for them - and that the law isn't feeble in the face of celebrity or media power. (I'm not saying we shouldn't have investigative journalism - we should - just seems mad that crimes like that weren't dealt with by the law itself.) What role should the media have in our legal and moral life?
What are your thoughts on social media? It's not the press but the ordinary folk, the pub/school gate gossip about celebs but out there for all to see on twitter/Fb/forums. And not just when it's about who was arrested today but also the who's shagging who.
Ps I feel we should discuss this more in-depth, how about lunch?
"And thats what makes it all the more astonishing that the prime minister could have gone back on his word to the victims (I don't include myself- I'm talking about real victims, people like the Dowlers and the Mcann's) within hours of the report being published. "
Cameron is not a man known for his integrity. I think the saying goes - what do you expect from a pig but a grunt.
If it were up to you, what would be the single most important piece of legislation you would put into place to protect the public right to privacy?
mariekjulia123
Did you meant to be the worldwide face of the Hacking Inquiry ?
No, L'Oreal was always my ambition. But it turns out I'm not worth it. Having said that, I'm very glad to be doing this. This isn't a thing of the past, despite what the papers may say. Only this year, an 11-year-old called Sebastian Bowles was killed in a coach crash in Switzerland.
His picture was taken from his Facebook page without his parents' permission and printed in three national newspapers. They also printed long lens pictures of his nine-year-old sister preparing to lay flowers at the crash site.
And all this despite the family's pleas to respect their privacy. None of this was against the law, but was in direct contravention of the Editors' Code of Practice, a code of practice that was openly and repeatedly flouted under the present system.
I'm all confused, we're watching Remains of the Day on the telly and you've just been typing away on an old typewriter. Quite glad I'm not drunk or it would just be too much.
I see other, faster Mumsnetters have Hugh sewn up for Christmas. But we also do Solstice! And since it's on the 21st, you don't have to wait so long for a slap-up meal (and have four days in between to do some cardio and work it off before Crimbo).
Qualified chef for a partner, seaside town, could be the tranquility you need.
Rumour has it that the Daily Mail caught Ian Huntly & Maxine Carr after the police in Soham realised that Huntly was well aware of his 'rights' to resist the attempts of the Plods, so local coppers, desperate to find the girls, sent the guy from the Mail to tea at Chateau Ian. DM man bugged their coffee table. The girls were dead (had been for days) but the DM tape did for H&C anyway. Allegedly.
How do you reconcile press regulation for Bad Things and Hurt Feelings with allowing the press to break the rules in a way that delivers important social resilts? You're much too clever to suggest the police should do their job better.
We at Hacked Off, campaign for there to be legal defences for journalists who break certain laws in pursuit of important public interest stories. That could include phone hacking - if you are uncovering a paedophile's activities or the MPs expenses scandal. We want to free up journalists to do great investigative work and release them from the shackles of their corporate masters and their purely commercial agenda. That is why the NUJ sits on platforms with Hacked Off and why we mention it in our petition (see how I slipped that in - it's at our Hacked Off website).
Hugh, that about Sebastian is just disgusting. Do you think that the press carry on this way because all respect for others has been lost ? Any story is good, no matter how distasteful ?
Do you like biscuits? I like biscuits! Kit kats are my favourite, or maybe a hobnob!
<Slaps self> Serious question! What form do you think the statutory underpinning we are hearing so much about right now, should look like?
In response to your serious question...
I support the form recommended by a senior judge who sat for a year taking evidence and thinking about it for months. His name was Leveson and he recommended that any new system of self-regulation that the press came up with to replace the PCC was verified (that is the "underpinning") as being independent and effective by another body - independent of politicians - set up in law (that's the "statutory"). This is needed, said Sir Brian because for decades each system devised by the press has failed. He said it was essential. I agree, so do 80% of the public.
In fact, I would like to know if that number holds true with Mumsnetters. I would like you to write in to MNHQ and ask them to support us publicly If you don't...I won't come back!
The press intrusion to victims of crime is totally abhorrent and should be a criminal act. However, unfortunately as so many celebrities seem to court the press and actively want any public attention, how can the press or public distinguish between news that is genuinely intrusive to the said celebrity and news that has been orchestrated as a deliberate publicity seeking action? Do you think both parties hold some responsibility?
I'm curious about this all, as it seems the media doesn't even take the threat of fines or punishments of any kind seriously. I noted comments in articles about the recent pictures taken of Kate Middleton when she was on holiday that the media figured it was worth any fines or risk of punishment.
How can it even be reigned in when the media isn't worried about the risk and the politicians are backtracking on it? Can legislation really provide the teeth to stop it?
I am genuinely interested to know whether you find yourself reading some of the newspaper stories that result from this poor practice? Do you think the papers are feeding our desire for salacious crap, or creating that desire? FWIW I think we Iare nosey voyeurs by nature and are best not encouraged. Its easy to be horrified by the intrusion on those in the public eye and yet find yourself strangely drawn to reading the very stories you are horrified about.
Hugh, how do you reconcile the desire of "celebrities" to be in the newspapers with their desire for privacy? Obviously it doesn't follow that just because someone is famous that that they should have their bins gone through, or their phone hacked, but I am thinking about something like being photographed on a night out. Is some intrusion on the private life a celebrity the price they pay for the benefit they gain from receiving press attention at other times? If the answer is that some things are okay but too much intrusion is not then how and where does the line get drawn, and by whom?
Since your involvement with Hacked Off have you noticed any difference in the way the paps + press treat you? Do they hold back or are they more aggressive?
To be honest, what happens to me is entirely irrelevant. In my job you're always going to get more attention than you might like, and that has never been my moan. I am pissed off about stuff that's happened to my elderly father or to the children of my girlfriend. They're not in show business and don't deserve it. But the real scandal here, is what happens to people like the Dowlers or the Bowles and about what happened with regard to the police, and the capture and ownership of our democratically elected politicians.
At one point it looked like David Cameron was willing to split up the coalition in order to defend the "freedom of the press" over effective regulation. How disappointing do you find his response? Do you think the extemities of media intrusion and manipulation uncovered by Leveson have fallen on deaf ears?
There are cynics (of course I'm not one of them) who would say that Cameron's position has less to do with freedom of the press and more to do with pleasing the press. He is in grave danger of doing what every other PM has done in the same position over the last 70 years, ie please the press barons and go for political expediency in the face of public opinion and principle.
Aren't the days of the power of the printed press numbered any way - which makes Cameron's stance even more staggering?
I don't know anyone who gets a paper delivered. Or really goes out of their way to buy one. Most people just glance over a copy of the utter wank Metro on the train don't they? (has anyone noticed they can barely even give them away now?) And that is people my age, the young 'uns just do their news online.
What I'm saying is all these middle aged misogynistic cock waving editors will soon be consigned to the gutter so isn't that where the future lies, in reducing the demand for the trash and lies? Consistently revealing to people what utter wankers a lot of the editors are so they do not want to be aligned or associated with reading them - i.e. create a shame culture for everyone who reads the DM, or Murdoch shite, much as they do about many things themselves.
But don't you think that's a bit twattish of Scameron ?
Once the press realise that the public will vote him out at the next GE, the very press he courts will do all it can to blacken him...not that it will need much help.
And the press also do their own pleasing. in return. Their demonisation of benefit claimants and the disabled makes it easier for him to push his Welfare Reform Bill because after all "they are all scroungers and fraudsters" Cameron IDS and co dont want to change a thing.
Hi Hugh Quick question. Are any newspapers in your opinion worth reading? Can we trust any of them?!! Thank you
The Brentford and Chiswick Chronicle. Avoid the others
No, serious answer. Clearly, there are great newspapers in this country (The Guardian, The Independent, FT) and there is great journalism in all the others. Our argument is that there simply isn't enough, and that to a certain extent our whole newspaper industry has been hijacked over the last 40 years by powerful media barons with an agenda quite different to good public interest journalism. We'd like to get it back out of their hands.
"Aren't the days of the power of the printed press numbered any way...?"
mcmooncup when I first started studying graphic design 25 years ago, I was told to ignore print as it was dead. Doesn't look very dead yet, does it? Plenty of people still buy the newspaper every day.
THANK YOU...now if everyone else could sign our petition we might actually stand a chance of reaching a quarter of a million signatures by Christmas.
The government changed it's mind about the badger cull at 160,000 - we are nearly at the same figure and we haven't had a whiff of a U-turn...we need your help.
Did the unwanted media attention that your daughter and her mother received influence your decision to become the 'poster boy' for this cause (no offence meant).
Your life has never been entirely private, but did becoming a parent increase your concerns ?
Whilst fully supportive of Hacked off, my question is... Should I be concerned that whilst reading your answers I am hearing your 'love actually' voice over voice?!
I'm all confused, we're watching Remains of the Day on the telly and you've just been typing away on an old typewriter. Quite glad I'm not drunk or it would just be too much.
That is a deliberate and cunning new strategy devised by Mumsnet and Columbia pictures I believe their word is synergy. Do you like my hair?
Anyone else reading his responses in is accent and floppy hairness way?
<swoon>
Hugh, not completely in topic, but can you please confirm that the line "It's raining, I hadn't noticed" has to be one of the most stupid lines in a film ever.
Hello Hugh, while the suffering of many victims of press abuse is undeniable, don't you agree there is a degree of hypocrisy about all this? How many members of the public express disgust at invasions of privacy, but at the same time log onto to TMZ to see pics of Prince Harry in Vegas or topless pics of The Duchess of Cambridge. Not everyone, maybe, and perhaps not many here, but quite a few, I'll bet.
I was working at Marie Curie when you supported the Daffodil Appeal in 2007-Your passion for your cause was very evident - Why do you this the Hacked Off campaign is so important?
Despite not having a sensible question to ask I would just like the observe that this is the first web chat where I can hear the responses spoken by the author (IYSWIM). Lovely to have you here Mr Grant. Well done with your work with Hacked Off.
I feel very guilty now as I'm always reading the daily mail I shall only read The Guardian now and hope that I can be re educated. Hopefully it's never too late.
Hugh, that about Sebastian is just disgusting. Do you think that the press carry on this way because all respect for others has been lost ? Any story is good, no matter how distasteful ?
I think the honest answer is that because of their enormous power some editors have operated largely above the law and above any normal standards of decency. And no one has dared to challenge them because they are a very scary enemy. The Sebastian Bowles case is not unusual. Think of JK Rowling's children having notes from reporters stuffed in their school satchels. Or the funeral of Ann Diamond's baby being plastered all over the front of The Sun. Despite her requests for privacy.
Would it be a workable compromise (for both sides) to add a renewable sunset clause into any statutory underpinning?
Funnily enough I used to discuss this on set with Renee and Colin; we agreed that since what is needed in such underpinning is stability and permanence, a renewable sunset clause is the last thing we need. Parliament should set up the independent validator that Leveson said was essential and then leave it alone.
In light of all that has happened with Hacked Off etc., where do you stand on the current furore around the Oz DJs and their ridiculous prank call that seemingly resulted in a tragic death?
Not about the call itself, that was just stupid. I am wondering about the way the UK media has turned from the witch hunt around the nurses to a witch hunt around the djs? Do either deserve the level of publicity and press invasion that has happened? Where should privacy laws fit in here?
Oh, and have you ever tried the Hairy Bikers Christmas Pudding vodka? A great festive treat to add to that toffee tooth you have there!
I think Hugh should have stuck on the Brentford & Chiswick CHronicle tbh. Naming Grauniad and the not-terribly-independent makes this look like a left vs. right issue and very easy to ignore on that basis.
I've personally experienced having to bury my own child, and cannot comprehend how sickening it must feel to have you and your children plastered everywhere for all to see, while trying to deal with your grief.
I'll do all I can to let as many people as I can know about your petition, as I do think there has to be a clear line drawn that is not crossed any longer.
I think Hugh should have stuck on the Brentford & Chiswick CHronicle tbh. Naming Grauniad and the not-terribly-independent makes this look like a left vs. right issue and very easy to ignore on that basis
You're not very informed if you think this is a Left vs Right issue, or one that can be easily ignored.
When my friend was 16, she shagged the English teacher who looked a bit like Hugh and the News of the World came knocking on her door. It was very strange.
The Sebastian story is just one of many.
I imagine but don't actually know, the nurse who committed suicide last week wasn't especially treated brilliantly by the press, and there are pictures today of her grieving children. 2 weeks after Leveson
What in your opinion is the single most important reason for backing Leveson? I'm afraid I've found your answers so far to be a little bit ... slippery and politiciany.
Im completely disgusted with the way those sections of the media treat people who have been through so much and are greiving. It just HAS to stop. And putting notes into childrens satchels and hassling the children of well known people. Just because their parent is well known for what they do doesnt mean their children are public property. They deserve to go through their childhood without being persecuted by greedy "journalists" .
It's probably best to read a wide range of newspapers but not to really believe anything in them. I haven't read the g or the I for years but will track them down online and hope that I can understand the content!
Hugh, that about Sebastian is just disgusting. Do you think that the press carry on this way because all respect for others has been lost ? Any story is good, no matter how distasteful ?
I think the honest answer is that because of their enormous power some editors have operated largely above the law and above any normal standards of decency. And no one has dared to challenge them because they are a very scary enemy. The Sebastian Bowles case is not unusual. Think of JK Rowling's children having notes from reporters stuffed in their school satchels. Or the funeral of Ann Diamond's baby being plastered all over the front of The Sun. Despite her requests for privacy.
StartRight
Hi Hugh I hope you are well.
The press intrusion to victims of crime is totally abhorrent and should be a criminal act. However, unfortunately as so many celebrities seem to court the press and actively want any public attention, how can the press or public distinguish between news that is genuinely intrusive to the said celebrity and news that has been orchestrated as a deliberate publicity seeking action? Do you think both parties hold some responsibility?
First of all let me say I'm wearing your shoes and think they're superb. There are people who court publicity but in my experience, they are in the tiny minority of all those dumped in the giant vat marked celeb by the papers. Being in the papers is actually almost entirely irrelevant to the success or failure of a film or song or website. It really does come down in the end to whether its ay good or not. To say its all about being in the papers is the propaganda of those papers and justifies shoving notes in JK Rowlings childrens satchel
arcovette these days I have a rule that I have to see a story in at least 3 reliable newspapers, either online or in print, before I'll believe it. Twitter, Facebook and DM do not count!
Did the unwanted media attention that your daughter and her mother received influence your decision to become the 'poster boy' for this cause (no offence meant).
Your life has never been entirely private, but did becoming a parent increase your concerns ?
Thanks.
I was heavily involved in this before I became a father but I won't pretend that the harassment of the mother of my child and the theft of her intimate medical details by a major national newspaper didn't stoke my fire. I would tell you more but there's a law suit pending.
TeeElfOnTeeShelf American news isn't even in the same universe compared to the UK for sleb gossip. I couldn't beilve the shit that gets plastered on the front of papers when I first came to England.
You are old enough to be my dad I think. Still you made some decent films.
<keeps cool unlike some others on here>
Just would like to ask why you decided MumsNet was the place to come and more importantly. Do you love my name?
That is all.
To be honest, this whole issue rests on a knife edge. You've got the prime minister and the press barons trying preserve the cosy status quo. And then you've got 80% of the public, the Labour party, the lib dems and the victims trying to make Leveson meaningful I'm just trying to gather more support for our side to tip the balance and I though the people of Mumsnet might help. I also have a mother fixation...
DoingitOnTheRoofTopWithHugh You've obviously never lived in California. It's just as bad, if not worse.
The difference is, I think, there are a lot fewer newspapers in the US. Each city has one, maybe two, major papers. Not like here where there are, it seems, hundreds. So the English papers have to be as outrageous as possible to get readers.
Do you really think 'we' can make a difference though ? Scameron and pals have listened to no-one on anything else, so why should this be any different ?
It seems like while they are in power, and because they know they have limited time, they will screw the country over to suit themselves and their pals, and leave a bloody great mess for others to clear up.
I wish 'we' the public would find our voices and unite over lots of issues, not just this, but it feels like it's hopeless.
Oh, no, not headlines like that, DoingitOnTheRoofTopWithHugh, I'll agree with that. But the press in the US do just as much dirty digging as the ones in England.
I live in France and the attitude towards the press here is very different, or at least it was. I think what happened with The Duchess of Camebrige recently shows that things are changing here too, and obviously not for the better.
Do you think it might be beneficial or you to go rifling through the bins of some of the higher up politicians? Just to give them a taste of their own medicine?
I'll go with you, we can disguise ourselves as urban foxes
Anyway, I have to go thank you very much to Mumsnet for having me here and for the sushi. If you are at all sympathetic to any of my rant do please go to the Hacked Off website- you'll know what to do.
VikingVagine I agree. In the 14 years I have been in France the press has become much more sleb twaddle obsessed and some of the nastiness printed even in Le Monde for example about Rachida Dati or DSK's accusers is disgusting.
Thanks for taking the time to reply. I agree it is shocking that children are targeted just because of their parents. I am a teacher, and like most other professions, we have an agreed code of conduct and duty of care which reflects the responsibility of being 'in loco parentis' for the kids we teach. It is a shame the press don't have a similar agreed level of professionalism for their own sake as well as ours.
Who is the giggling interviewer? She sounds worse that us lot, trying to ask important questions while failing miserably to get past the fact IT'S HUGH GRANT talking to us!
We'll be cooking a goose anyway, so it's no bother. DS would love someone to play on his xbox with him whilst I cook for hours. It would be incredibly crazy though.
Well, signed and will share in a bit, once all my friends have gotten over my last sharing campaign.
Yes, MNHQ, I am most definitely one of the 80% and would like to voice my support for you lot to support HO.
On a personal note, having known a celeb for a while in a professional capacity, and become very friendly with them and the family in that time, I can see how it changes one to become so guarded and cautious about knowing and trusting anybody. I would hate to have to be like that, but could see why it's so necessary. No-one should have to live their lives like a hunted fox.
But on a lighter note, cor blimey, that video made me loosen my collar a tad! [hgrin]
Lots of love, Hugh, (if you ever come back to read!) and keep up the good work.
That was a great webchat even if I didn't get any flirting. Can MNHQ please ask Hugh to make it an annual Christmas event, even if his campaign is successful? As a national treasure he surely owes it to the mothers of Britain to keep morale up, as they say.
I'm cooking anyway, so it would be no bother. I have guests on the 21st so have to clean up, so that will be no bother either. I just hope he brings some champagne with him.
Crunchie Stuffing? What's that?
Starter of smoked salmon on 'stuff', roast goose and the trimmings for main, chocolate cake for desert and a lot of wine! Sound OK?
<sigh> I was dying to tell someone at work today that I had a question answered last night - by HUGH GRANT! But, it would mean outing myself <doh!> so I can't do it. Damn.
I'll just need to get on with the t-shirt printing, and watch the puzzled looks I get when wearing it.
I really like the little mumsnet video. I thought Hugh Grant came across as so much nicer, more natural and - yes, a lot younger- than he looked in his movies. His normal voice is so much nicer than the poshed up one he used for Hollywood. Wishing him a very happy Christmas. DD and I watch 'Love Actually' every Christmas, so I owe him many thanks for very happy memories while I curl up on the sofa with my daughter year after year.
Swoooooon i would just love to meet Hugh Grant in the flesh. He's a dish, a good English dish of boiled potatoes, boiled carrots, overdone roast beef and boiled plum pudding.
) is joining us for a webchat tonight, Monday, December 10 at 8pm.
<sick face
)
while doing it?
Registering is free, easy, and means you join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more. Register now