Dowlers and McCanns 'oppose newspapers' plan for new regulator'
Page 1 of 1 • Share
Dowlers and McCanns 'oppose newspapers' plan for new regulator'
by Guest 25.07.12 8:38
Dowlers and McCanns 'oppose newspapers' plan for new regulator'
Lawyer for victims of press intrusion tells Leveson inquiry that Lord Hunt and Lord Black's proposals are 'hopeless'
The Leveson inquiry was told that Bob and Sally Dowler and others oppose the press industry's plan for a new regulator. Photograph: Pool/Reuters
The 50 victims of alleged phone hacking and other media intrusion represented at the Leveson inquiry are opposing the newspaper industry's proposals for reform of press regulation.
David Sherborne, counsel for the victims, which include the Dowler and McCann families, described the proposals put forward by Lord Hunt, chairman of the Press Complaints Commission, as "hopeless".
The new regulator being backed by newspapers to replace the PCC would involve a continuation of self-regulation but with new powers to investigate systemic wrongdoing and the power to fine errant papers up to £1m.
"The simple fact is that Lord Hunt's proposal is not, as the inquiry has heard, what the victims would require. Its starting point, its whole premise is what is acceptable to the industry. But forgive me, we're not here solely to decide what is acceptable to the industry," Sherborne told the inquiry on Tuesday in his closing statement.
"We're here because the industry is not acceptable to the public, with whom there seems to have been no consultation by Lord Hunt's team."
He said the proposals that have come out of the "still surviving, but only just breathing PCC" would not wash with the public, who want an independent statute-backed regulator "which is created for the public and is not run by service editors".
"However well intentioned it may be, as a proposal to deal with the practice, culture and ethics we've witnessed, it is hopeless," Sherborne added.
Sherborne said that the public wanted a clean break with the past and deserved a new press regulator that was independent and had teeth.
He said that arguments put forward by newspapers that statutory regulation would lead to interference by politicians or have a "chilling effect" on investigative journalism were "specious".
"We say there should be an entirely new regime, a clean break not just in name but in substance from everything that has come before and failed," said Sherborne.
He added that the new press regulator should not involve working editors adjudicating on complaints.
"There should be separate mechanisms for rule-making, for investigations, including investigations of the regulator's own motion, and most importantly for adjudications. A body of independent adjudicators should rule upon complaints as to media conduct and serving editors should have no role in that," Sherborne said.
"The public wants more objective standards and the starting point for that is an independent statute-backed regulator, which is created for the public and is not run by serving editors and one which can hold this enormously influential body to account, as they hold us to account in turn."
He said that unless someone gets a "very firm grip" of the tabloid press, newspapers will continue to behave badly. Sherborne told Lord Justice Leveson he feared that tabloids would be back to their old ways as soon as the "ink dried on your report", which is expected to be published in the autumn.
"To some extent over the last eight months, what has been lost is the voice of the victims," he said, referring to the fact that the victims of press intrusion he represents gave evidence early on during the Leveson witness hearings, in late 2011.
Sherborne went on to list some of what he described as "a catalogue of wrongs, systemic, flagrant and deeply entrenched". "We are not here to focus on the good journalists. We don't need an inquiry for them. We are here to consider the bad ones," he said.
"The press is on trial here, and not simply in this room but also out there in the court of public opinion. And they know it. That is why they are so scared of what evidence has been heard here.
"Unless someone takes a grip, a very firm grip, of the tabloid press, we will be back to the same position as soon as the spotlight is turned off and the ink is dry on your report.
"And we are all concerned it may be payback time – payback for those who have sought to stand up. Hopefully the press will resist the temptation once this is over."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jul/24/dowler-mccann-newspaper-regulator
Lawyer for victims of press intrusion tells Leveson inquiry that Lord Hunt and Lord Black's proposals are 'hopeless'
Lisa O'Carroll- guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 24 July 2012 17.32 BST
The Leveson inquiry was told that Bob and Sally Dowler and others oppose the press industry's plan for a new regulator. Photograph: Pool/Reuters
The 50 victims of alleged phone hacking and other media intrusion represented at the Leveson inquiry are opposing the newspaper industry's proposals for reform of press regulation.
David Sherborne, counsel for the victims, which include the Dowler and McCann families, described the proposals put forward by Lord Hunt, chairman of the Press Complaints Commission, as "hopeless".
The new regulator being backed by newspapers to replace the PCC would involve a continuation of self-regulation but with new powers to investigate systemic wrongdoing and the power to fine errant papers up to £1m.
"The simple fact is that Lord Hunt's proposal is not, as the inquiry has heard, what the victims would require. Its starting point, its whole premise is what is acceptable to the industry. But forgive me, we're not here solely to decide what is acceptable to the industry," Sherborne told the inquiry on Tuesday in his closing statement.
"We're here because the industry is not acceptable to the public, with whom there seems to have been no consultation by Lord Hunt's team."
He said the proposals that have come out of the "still surviving, but only just breathing PCC" would not wash with the public, who want an independent statute-backed regulator "which is created for the public and is not run by service editors".
"However well intentioned it may be, as a proposal to deal with the practice, culture and ethics we've witnessed, it is hopeless," Sherborne added.
Sherborne said that the public wanted a clean break with the past and deserved a new press regulator that was independent and had teeth.
He said that arguments put forward by newspapers that statutory regulation would lead to interference by politicians or have a "chilling effect" on investigative journalism were "specious".
"We say there should be an entirely new regime, a clean break not just in name but in substance from everything that has come before and failed," said Sherborne.
He added that the new press regulator should not involve working editors adjudicating on complaints.
"There should be separate mechanisms for rule-making, for investigations, including investigations of the regulator's own motion, and most importantly for adjudications. A body of independent adjudicators should rule upon complaints as to media conduct and serving editors should have no role in that," Sherborne said.
"The public wants more objective standards and the starting point for that is an independent statute-backed regulator, which is created for the public and is not run by serving editors and one which can hold this enormously influential body to account, as they hold us to account in turn."
He said that unless someone gets a "very firm grip" of the tabloid press, newspapers will continue to behave badly. Sherborne told Lord Justice Leveson he feared that tabloids would be back to their old ways as soon as the "ink dried on your report", which is expected to be published in the autumn.
"To some extent over the last eight months, what has been lost is the voice of the victims," he said, referring to the fact that the victims of press intrusion he represents gave evidence early on during the Leveson witness hearings, in late 2011.
Sherborne went on to list some of what he described as "a catalogue of wrongs, systemic, flagrant and deeply entrenched". "We are not here to focus on the good journalists. We don't need an inquiry for them. We are here to consider the bad ones," he said.
"The press is on trial here, and not simply in this room but also out there in the court of public opinion. And they know it. That is why they are so scared of what evidence has been heard here.
"Unless someone takes a grip, a very firm grip, of the tabloid press, we will be back to the same position as soon as the spotlight is turned off and the ink is dry on your report.
"And we are all concerned it may be payback time – payback for those who have sought to stand up. Hopefully the press will resist the temptation once this is over."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jul/24/dowler-mccann-newspaper-regulator
Guest- Guest
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
