Live webchat with Hugh Grant (!!!) about the Leveson report and press reform, Monday 10 December, 8pm

[JustineMumsnet]

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.

[Alibabaandthe40nappies]

Hello Hugh!

I will come back with a sensible question later, but I just wanted to say that you were fabulous at the Leveson Enquiry.

[BettySuarez]

Hello Hugh

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?

[oohlaalaa]

Hi Hugh!

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.

• Oohlaalaa

[bunchamunchycrunchycarrots]

mcmooncup I luffs you!

[TunipTheVegedude]

Thank you for coming, Hugh.

If sleazy tabloid journalists were to go through your bin, what kind of biscuit wrappers would they find in there?

[GlaikitFizzogTheChristmasElf]

HUGH GRANT

Um, I don't know what to ask!

Do you like biscuits? I like biscuits! Kit kats are my favourite, or maybe a hobnob!

Serious question! What form do you think the statutory underpinning we are hearing so much about right now, should look like?

[VenetiaLanyon]

Hi Hugh,

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?

Thanks

[oxeye]

Hi Hugh,

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?

[ClementineKelandra]

I'm wondering just how many members of MNHQ will be working overtime tonight?

[grovel]

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.

[YoothaJoyce]

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.

[bunchamunchycrunchycarrots]

Clementine, that very same thought passed through my tiny wee brain...

[peroxideporker]

Would it be a workable compromise (for both sides) to add a renewable sunset clause into any statutory underpinning?

[BaublesAndCuntingCarolSingers]

Hi Hugh,

Would you like me to knee Dacre in the balls for you?

PM me, if so.

[MrsChristmasVamos]

Baubles

You might be able to, if the little runt actually had any.

[BaublesAndCuntingCarolSingers]

True, true...

[bunchamunchycrunchycarrots]

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 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.

[Justfeckingdoit]

Hi Hugh

I will love you forever for how great you were on QT.

Given that most of the worst excesses of the press examined by Leverson were illegal anyway, can any self reg or legislation really achieve anything?

Newspaper owners arguing for press freedom is a bit like a pimp arguing for sexual freedom. Discuss

[AngeFox]

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. :)

[notactuallyme]

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.

[AngeFox]

Campaign

[CometAndCupid]

Oh my god!!

I love him, I love him, I love him! What a man.

That is all.

[SrirachaGirl]

If you are offered a tin of Quality Street, which one do you go for ?

[ChoccyJules]

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.

[Darkesteyes]

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.