Leveson - the outcome

[bunchamunchycrunchycarrots]

previous thread & another one

So, the report will finally be made public tomorrow - wonder what the outcome will be? Will Cameron actually go with the recommendations or not?

[noddyholder]

The mccanns 'think' it was the Portuguese police? Why doesn't the sun tell them so they re sure? Maybe it's because een though they printed extracts Kate McCann still signed a deal with them to serialise her book. Double standards

[chipstick10]

I know it's going off topic but seriously!!, Gerry McCann telling cam to do the right thing
. I know I can't express what I really want to say because I will get barred, but also hasn't cam slung 3million at them to re look at the Portuguese investigation into the mysterious disappearances of their daughter?

[bunchamunchycrunchycarrots]

chipstick, if you want to debate the mccanns, maybe start another thread? This thread is to discuss Leveson, not the mccanns.

[QuickLookBusy]

Noddy, Kate McCaan did not initially hand over her diaries for them to be printed.

Somone gave her private diaries to the press, without HER permission. That is a gross invasion of privacy and dispicable IMO.

That is the main point here and is relevant to Leveson.

[zamantha]

The anti-Mcann posts disturb me - they lost their little girl - have the press been honing in on their privilege as they did when a doctor's baby died in America with an English nanny. How many of us would stand up to the test of so much scrutiny? What would you do to try and find your child?

The gutter press are just that - vile uber-capitalists who believe immorality is proper. HG interviewed one who was unashamed that a lady committed suicide after he exposed her in press - druggie from posh background, was not entirely his fault but he knew he added to her unravelling -"If people want to read it it's news worthy he said"
Jude Law said he felt he was becoming paranoid - he was followed and hacked for years and had no idea - that is lack of basic human rights.

Much of the press are outrageous and must be regulated. I feel many posters read DM and such stuff and believe what they read.

[Proudnscaryvirginmary]

What's 'uber captitalist' mean?

What I think some people fail to understand is that it is all about supply and demand! When newspapers print such exposes they sell far more copies. Everyone who buys a newspaper on the back of such as story is as 'guilty' as the newspaper editors and proprietors.

I still think the British (free) press is something for us all to be proud of actually - yes it has got out of control and needs some serious reigning in because some people have acted despicably - but it is on the whole a force for good. We are one of the very few nations in this world where our media can expose wrongdoings and hypocrisy within government and other public organisations without fear of reprisals.

[Proudnscaryvirginmary]

Oops capitalist

[LaVolcan]

There is something of a difference between the Tabloids and the Broadsheets though. The Sun, Mail etc. print absolute rubbish 90% of the time, whereas the the Guardian, Telegraph, although not without bias, do have some sensible articles.

I have two minds about the McCanns though. I remember that the Express went to town that summer with pictures of Madeleine; her photo on the front sold newspapers in the way that Princess Di on a cover did. That I felt was OTT but, correct me if I am wrong, the McCanns and their friends reached a very comfortable out of court settlement with the Express (cue carefully posed pictures of said friends outside Royal Courts of Justice, even though the case didn't get to court.) But then Kate did choose to sell the serialisation rights of her book to the Sun, so clearly she didn't mind publicity then.

I was baffled about why they appeared at Leveson, because most of the phone hacking came about before Madeleine disappeared, and they said that their phones weren't hacked.

[mrsblossom]

If you agree with the Leveson report sign this petition:

hackinginquiry.org/petition

[pofacedalways]

complexnumber he has never commented publicly about the banking crisis or the need for an independent inquiry. There is no large number of high profile rich people [anonymous or not] utilizing their status to pressure for such an inquiry. I am allowed to have an opinion on whether I find that distasteful or not thanks.

[zamantha]

"uber-capitalist" - not sure how to express it - those that think greed is good and stalking is justified and many tabloid journalists genuinely think this.

[pofacedalways]

well our whole society is run on the basis that greed is good [basis of capitalism] but yes of course it isn't.

[TheOriginalPan]

Coogan in the Guardian, eviscerating Camrun

[crabbyoldbat]

Why have the police not been taken to task for a) not prosecuting criminals (which is what they are) and b) why isnt there a Jimmy Saville style investigation in to bribery and corruption in the police force around these issues,

Leveson had to be very careful, in case what he said prejudiced ongoing criminal investigations. A list of those arrested in connection with hacking, bribery and corruption is here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_persons_arrested,_charged_and_convicted_in_conjunction_with_the_news_media_phone_hacking_scandal

• several police officers on the list

[TheOriginalPan]

interesting that the press haven't made much mention of the GBP's preference for a legal framework.

[QuickLookBusy]

TheOrigionalPlan- that's a very good piece. I particularly enjoyed his description of Paul Dacre, editor of The Daily Mail

He is the embodiment of Fleet Street bullying, using his newspaper to peddle his Little-England, curtain-twitching Alan Partridgesque view of the world, which manages to combine sanctimonious, pompous moralising and prurient, voyeuristic, judgmental obsession, like a Victorian father masturbating secretly in his bedroom. This is the side of the press Cameron has sided with.

I don't think he likes him.

[TheOriginalPan]

[QuickLookBusy]

I apologise Original, I'm dyslexic so often make mistakes. as you can see

[TheOriginalPan]

S'okay QLB


NYT observations

[Viviennemary]

I think the press are in the wrong at times when they print untrue stories about people. But on the other hand if there was legislation I bet the MP's expenses row would never have been printed. And I don't like it when people lap up publicity and court press attention but the minute the press print something they don't like they are up in arms.

[crabbyoldbat]

The MPs expenses row would have been printed because it passes the 'public interest' test - that is, it's okay to act a bit underhandedly if you can show that it's in the public interest e.g. exposing corruption in high office.

Public interest is just not what the public is interested in, however, and gossip about celebs doesn't count.

[edam]

The risk is that legislation can have unintended consequences. Once there's a law specifically to control what can be published and what can't, on top of a multiplicity of existing laws (confidentiality, defamation, contempt of court, Official Secrets, being a party to misconduct in a public office and many, many more) then it may well be used by those who fear being exposed or embarrassed to choke off perfectly legitimate investigations. If it's dangerous legally to pursue an investigation, hence extremely expensive, proprietors will want them to be dropped, and journalists won't be allowed to even look for them, let alone report them.

Investigative journalism is expensive and time-consuming. Publishers are wary about spending money on stuff that could get them into trouble.

There is also the argument that celeb tittle tattle subsidises investigative journalism. Gossip sells newspapers and magazines which can then put money into serious journalism. Take the gossip away and the newspaper or magazine folds.

I used to edit an investigative magazine. We had every page read by a libel lawyer before going to press - something that cost a huge amount of money and is a luxury most publications could not afford. We'd still get shysters sending us threatening letters and trying it on (and politicians using PR spin - paid for by the taxpayer to try to shout us down). I was in the fortunate position of having the time and the legal backing to be sure that we'd conducted our investigations properly and ethically and that we could justify what we'd written. There's not many publications that can do that and indeed, that magazine eventually closed down partly because the finances didn't stack up (the publisher decided to invest their money in the main title and close the smaller ones).

I like to think we did some good work, certainly exposed quite a lot of wrongdoing, but the number of publications that are able to do that securely, knowing they are able to defend their work, is shrinking all the time.

[QuickLookBusy]

Edam-"Once there's a law specifically to control what can be published and what can't...."

Is that what Leveson is proposing?

[edam]

No, not as clearly as that. But he is proposing legislation to establish a regulator, and once you have legislation in place it can be amended, often without further debate in Parliament. The rich and powerful can put pressure on a regulator - look at the way the Press Complaints Commission* backed Murdoch and attacked the journalists exposing phone hacking.

*Not actually a regulator but the same principle applies.

There are already a host of laws that control what the media can and cannot report - they just need to be applied. The attorney general has already made progress wrt contempt of court after the Joanna Yeates case where Christopher Jeffries was traduced by the tabs. He woke up and started pursuing actions, and brought the tabs back into line.

[tb]

Perhaps the problem is that Cameron comes from a PR background, so is likely to have friends in all the 'wrong' places. He was only able to become leader of the Tory party as they were looking for a candidate to stand up against slippery slimy Tone.

Otherwise, the Tories would have probably had David Davies as leader, and as a result a lot of things would probably have been very different.