The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

Regards,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Page 8 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Post by aiyoyo on 25.03.13 20:29

I dont believe I have seen any of his films. I only know of him because he was Liz Hurley ex.

I believe it was tweeted he donated 5 grand to Kate's marathon for the Charity. Not sure whether tweeter recount is reliable.
Anyway he and gerry deserve one another - both dodgy and both have hugh ego. He may need some tips from gerry on how to commit a perfect crime, or how to spin, and he might have to borrow the pink creature if or when the Press turns against him.


aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 319
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Post by Guest on 25.03.13 23:34

@aiyoyo wrote: [...]
Anyway he and gerry deserve one another - both dodgy and both have hugh ego. [...]

***

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Post by Guest on 28.03.13 12:33

[snipped]

Graham Foulkes, whose son David, 22, was killed by a bomb at Edgware Road tube station in 2005, accused Hacked Off of hijacking the phone-hacking scandal for its own reasons and said the group is ‘not representative’ of the victims.


He and his wife decided not to sue News International for compensation. He insists the wrongdoing was already covered by the criminal law.


Mr Foulkes, from Oldham, said: ‘The fact is, phone hacking and bribery of officials is in itself a criminal offence. It is being dealt with in the criminal courts. Any law that says it’s against the law to break the law is just a nonsense.’

Labour leader Ed Miliband was ‘shameless’ in allowing Hacked Off, the celebrity campaign group fronted by Hugh Grant, to be involved in the late-night deal struck between the parties last week on Press regulation following Lord Justice Leveson’s inquiry, he said



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2300221/Hacked-Off-dont-speak-victims-insists-7-7-father-claims-campaign-group-cosied-Labour-extent-distinguish-them.html#ixzz2Opy2u2E1



Well said Mr Foulkes.






Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2300221/Hacked-Off-dont-speak-victims-insists-7-7-father-claims-campaign-group-cosied-Labour-extent-distinguish-them.html#ixzz2OpxqUVgk

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Post by jd on 28.03.13 12:47

Labour leader Ed Miliband was ‘shameless’ in allowing Hacked Off, the celebrity campaign group fronted by Hugh Grant, to be involved in the late-night deal struck between the parties last week on Press regulation following Lord Justice Leveson’s inquiry, he said

Common Purpose.....

Sir David Bell and Julia Middleton (Common Purpose) set up the Media Standards Trust, a lobby group which presented a huge amount of evidence to the Leveson Inquiry. The Media Standards Trust established Hacked Off, the virulently anti-popular-press campaign group which has boasted of its role in significantly increasing the Inquiry's terms of reference. The Media Standards Trust shared the same headquarters address as Common Purpose. It then shared an address with Hacked Off, whose funding it controlled

Many of those who provided the most hostile anti-press evidence to Leveson are linked to senior figures at the Media Standards Trust and Hacked Off. Common Purpose's tentacles appear to reach into every cranny of the inner sanctums of Westminster, Whitehall and academia. Common Purpose is connected to some of Britain's most powerful lobby and PR groups, whose influence on British politics has provoked continuing controversy

And yet who is the ultra-busy assessor helping Lord Justice Leveson write his report that could shape the future of the hitherto free press and the right to freedom of expression? Common Purpose trustee and former chairman Sir David Bell, creator of the Media Standards Trust and supporter of Hacked Off

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2233681/Leveson-Inquiry-Mail-dossier-raises-disturbing-questions-influence-quasi-masonic-nexus-people-know-best.html


____________________
Who pulled the strings?...THE SYMINGTONS..And the Scottish connections...Look no further if you dare

jd

Posts : 4152
Reputation : 15
Join date : 2011-07-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Post by yadda_yadda on 28.03.13 12:58

Is Gerry McCann still a member of Hacked Off?

yadda_yadda

Posts : 14
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2011-07-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Post by jd on 28.03.13 13:17

@yadda_yadda wrote:Is Gerry McCann still a member of Hacked Off?

I'd say gerry mccann is a member of Common Purpose

For starters....Hacked Off, Doctors, Astra Zeneca UK, Bell Pottinger, Common Purpose Leicestershire Glenfield Road (Glenfield Hospital), Both Common Purpose and the Find Madeleine Fund Trust used Haysmacintyre as their auditors

____________________
Who pulled the strings?...THE SYMINGTONS..And the Scottish connections...Look no further if you dare

jd

Posts : 4152
Reputation : 15
Join date : 2011-07-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Post by aiyoyo on 31.03.13 8:27


The truth about Hacked Off's media coup

Andrew Gilligan uncovers the intriguing connections between Leveson and
Left-wing ideology






Brian Cathcart is the director of the Hacked Off campaign. Photo: Reuters



By
Andrew Gilligan

10:00PM GMT 30 Mar 2013

Several weeks after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, one cynical
journalist paid tribute to her parents’ “great skill” in managing the press.

“To an extraordinary extent, this story has been managed by its central
characters,” he said. “Alastair Campbell may be nowhere about but this is,
if not spin, then highly sophisticated news management.”
A short time later,
this same journalist penned a nuanced defence of the media’s right to get
things wrong.

“The idea that people must always get their facts right, like almost
everything that is labelled common sense, is incomplete and unsatisfactory,”
he argued. “Life is more complicated than that . . . there are grey areas.”

In a fast-moving business, readers and lawyers “have to understand that you
can’t hang around until every detail is perfect.”

In the few years since he wrote those words, life for Brian Cathcart has
become a lot more black-and-white. In his new role as director of the Hacked
Off campaign for a controlled press, he now claims that “most British
national newspapers ruthlessly chose to exercise their great power for
evil”.

Press inaccuracy has become a disease curable only by a state-backed
regulator, and the McCann case is Exhibit A in what Hacked Off calls the
“atrocities” perpetrated by the press.


“A whole industry has been roundly condemned by an official public inquiry,”
Cathcart proclaims.


Lord Justice Leveson in fact said that he was “able to state with confidence
that the majority of press practice is good, if not very good... Broadly
speaking, stories are accurate, informative, well-written and respectful of
the rights and interests of others.” Cathcart may not approve of tabloid
journalists, but he certainly knows how to behave like one.


Who are Hacked Off? And how did Brian Cathcart and a small group of even more
obscure allies come from nowhere to write perhaps the most important
constitutional change yet of the 21st century?


The royal charter which has just ended 300 years of an unregulated press was,
as they boast, “drafted with the help of Hacked Off”. The even more
controversial “statutory underpinning,” with its coercive damages and fines,
was, as they boast, “a measure suggested by Hacked Off’s chairman”.


The bragging is, if anything, underplayed: Lord Justice Leveson all but cut
and pasted their suggestions into his report and the Government has adopted
them with relatively few changes.


Hacked Off did it by using all the red-top tricks they claim to hate –
broad-brush condemnations, simplistic arguments, distorted facts,
behind-the-scenes political deal making, celebrity stardust and the emotive
deployment of victims.


Their key skill was in presenting the crimes of some newspapers as the
responsibility of all, and defining the issue as what Gerry McCann, on the
Hacked Off website, called “a binary choice: the newspaper barons or the
people they abused in search of profit. It is as simple as that.”


It is of course nothing like as simple as that.


But though Hacked Off acts in the name of victims of the press, victims are
not its central concern. Unknown to most of the people it lobbies, Hacked
Off is a campaign not just to tame the press, but to claim the country for
the authoritarian Left.
It does want to stop newspapers victimising
individuals. But it also wants to force the press to serve defined social
and political objectives – at the expense, if necessary, of the right to
free expression.


As its key intellectual inspiration, Prof James Curran of Goldsmiths College,
put it: “The problem is that the press was the principal cheerleader of the
deregulatory politics that landed us in the economic mess we’re in.


“Our concerns should be confined not only to individual abuses, but to media
moguls who distort the national conversation.”


Curran was speaking at a meeting on May 17 last year, one of several jointly
organised by Hacked Off and a fascinating body he co-founded, the
Co-ordinating Committee for Media Reform.


CCMR, which has received virtually no publicity in the mainstream media, is
closely intertwined with Hacked Off, sharing key personnel.


Prof Natalie Fenton, another Goldsmiths academic and a key member of CCMR, is
a director of Hacked Off. She co-chaired the meeting with Cathcart and is
seen on the platform at most of Hacked Off’s events.


Writing on the “New Left Project” website, Fenton attacked the “excessively
liberalised press” and the “naive pluralism” of “assuming that the more news
we have, the more democratic our societies are”.


Curran, whose major book on the media is described as “the Bible” by Brian
Cathcart, dismisses any regulatory model based simply on the “social worker
mediation of individual grievances” – a sign, perhaps, of where victims
really lie in his priorities.


He attacks what he calls the “First Amendment fundamentalism” of British
newspapers, saying they should have “an obligation to serve the public good”
and that discussion of media reform “should not be limited only to defending
freedom of expression”. Another Hacked Off supporter, Prof Chris Frost,
says: “The right to free expression… cannot be absolute… the key is to allow
as much freedom as is concomitant with the rights of others balanced by the
public interest.”


Frost wants newspapers to be forced to reflect “a fair selection of the day’s
events”; a regulator, in other words, would decide what stories they covered.


At the May 17 event, numerous Left-wing speakers outlined their view of how
the “public good” or the “public interest” as defined by a press regulator,
should override freedom of expression.


Jacqui Davis, from Keep our NHS Public, said the media should be obliged to
“stand up for the NHS”. Jacqui Hunt, from Equality Now, called for the
regulator to ban Page 3, impose compulsory training for male journalists and
require all reports on domestic violence to be “sensitive”.


Other groups described as “partner organisations” by Hacked Off’s website
include the newly-established Youth Media Agency, which complained that the
media’s “discriminatory” coverage of the August 2011 riots “singled out
children and young people as the rioters” (72 per cent of those arrested
were under 25) and Trans Media Watch, which condemns newspapers for
“stigmatising” transsexuals. Alleged examples of discrimination, which Trans
Media Watch wants to ban, included a reference to the Bois de Boulogne, a
park in Paris, as “containing transsexual prostitutes”.


Another Hacked Off “partner” is Engage, an “anti-discrimination” group
including Islamist sympathisers and whose staff have justified the killing
of British soldiers. Engage was exposed by The Sunday Telegraph, in what it
would no doubt protest to a regulator was “discriminatory” reporting.


Tim Luckhurst, professor of journalism at the University of Kent and a
supporter of the rival Free Speech Network, funded by newspaper publishers,
says: “It is not the job of the press to 'support’ or 'oppose’ the NHS, but
to scrutinise it.


“Hacked Off criticise the press for not representing a variety of viewpoints,
but that is precisely what they despise about it. Leveson has been persuaded
to embrace unquestioningly a profoundly ideological description of the
relationship between the British press and democracy, previously held only
by a small group of Left-of-centre academics.”


Hacked Off’s staff does contain at least two token Conservatives – its
spokesman, David Hass, is a former adviser to the then justice secretary,
Ken Clarke, and its head of campaigns, Ella Mason, was a Tory aide at the
2010 election.


But a briefing memo, written by Mason and leaked to a newspaper last week,
makes clear the campaign despises those Tories it has successfully used,
saying: “These are likely to be people you intuitively distrust, dislike and
despair of. If they are what we need to win, however, we must understand
their value and not confuse their values with our intentions.”


Most of the organisation’s staff and those credited on its website are firmly
of the Left. John Dickinson-Lilley, its parliamentary affairs officer, is a
former Labour adviser. Julianne Marriott, who handles government relations,
is a member of the Labour Party and director of Don’t Judge My Family, a
campaign against the marriage tax allowance.


Hacked Off’s public contact person, Francine Hoenderkamp, is news editor of
the “UK Feminista” website, “organiser of the Orgasmotron live music night”
and the coordinator of the Turn Your Back on Page 3 campaign.


Jessica Riches, its web coordinator, is a former star of the campus Occupy
movement. Cathcart himself is a fervent enthusiast for a united Europe who
has described sterling as “nothing to be proud of”.


Two powerful lobbying companies with close links to the Labour Party have also
supported Hacked Off. They are Sovereign Strategy, a controversial firm run
by Labour’s former leader in the European Parliament and repeatedly exposed
for alleged unethical dealings by the press, and BBM, run by two of Tony
Blair’s former campaign staff.


Hacked Off sits at the centre of a network of broadly Left-liberal groups who
have been campaigning for many years for media regulation but whose efforts
were given a massive boost by the hacking scandal.


It grew out of the Media Standards Trust, which as early as 2009, long before
the scandal broke, declared the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) unfit for
purpose – claiming, without much evidence, that its “ineffectiveness” had
reduced trust in the media.


In fact, MORI, which has polled on the question every year since 1999, finds
that trust in journalists has risen slightly over that time. The Media
Standards Trust’s director, Martin Moore, is also a director of Hacked Off.


The Media Standards Trust also launched Full Fact, a purportedly independent
fact-checking website into the press and frequent complainant to the PCC,
several of whose factchecks contain subtle Left-wing bias and whose
complaints to the PCC are almost entirely against Right-wing newspapers.


Full Fact’s chief executive, Will Moy, is also a director of Hacked Off.


In 2010 Full Fact was refused charitable status by the Charity Commission on
the grounds, according to Moy, that it did not meet “rigorous standards of
objectivity and independence”.


Full Fact’s directors at the time of the Leveson Inquiry were two Labour
peers, a Liberal Democrat peer and a former journalist tightly allied to Mr
Blair, John Lloyd.



Lloyd, director of journalism at the Reuters Institute for the Study of
Journalism at Oxford, is the author of a book saying media cynicism about
politics “undermines democracy” and calling for “intervention” to force news
organisations to do more to support public institutions. The book cited the
BBC’s story about Mr Blair’s “sexed-up” Iraq dossier as the key example of
media wrongdoing.


In late 2011 Lloyd, the Media Standards Trust and Hacked Off convened the
“Media Regulation Round Table,” the group which drew up what has now become
the royal charter. Two key representatives from the newspaper industry also
attended.


One of them, Bob Satchwell, director of the Society of Editors, now says: “I
was perhaps naive in going there, thinking that something as grand as the
Reuters Institute would have an open mind.


“We were the lone voices pushing for First Amendment purism, but it quickly
became obvious that the views of Hugh Tomlinson [chair of Hacked Off] and
Martin Moore were gaining all the weight.


“Hugh had his great scheme already half in place, and I said I was not
prepared to go along with it.”


Hacked Off still, however, cited Satchwell’s presence to Lord Justice Leveson
as proof that a “diverse and independent group” including the newspaper
industry had been involved, though it was careful not to explicitly claim
that Satchwell supported the plan. Impressed, Leveson cut and pasted
substantial elements of the round table’s proposal into his report.


Hacked Off’s ultimate triumph was, of course, when its representatives sat
round the table to pass its words into law. As its website exulted, “the
time for whining is over”.


Since then, however, amid a massive backlash against its plan, even Hacked Off
itself seems to recognise that it has overreached. “Did we win?” the website
now asks.


As the truth – about Hacked Off, and about its “deal” – emerges, we must hope
that the answer is no. For all the routine


disclaimers that no one wants political interference with the press, it is
clear that is precisely what Hacked Off does want.


This was a sort of coup, by people even more unaccountable and
unrepresentative than the average newspaper owners.



Who says investigative journalism is dead?

This piece of article is a damn fine example that investigative journalism is alive albeit applied selectively.









http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9963263/The-truth-about-Hacked-Offs-media-coup.html

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 319
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Post by plebgate on 31.03.13 8:53

Snipped from the article:

"
This was a sort of coup, by people even more unaccountable and
unrepresentative than the average newspaper owners.
"



Exactly

plebgate

Posts : 5518
Reputation : 1251
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Post by aiyoyo on 31.03.13 9:53

Now that the left wing in collusion with Hacked Off has pulled off this coup, are they the real winners? It is left to be seen.
It does not pay to get on the wrong side of the Press Owners, after all the power of the Press (regulated or not) is not to be underestimated.

To a large degree, all politicians need the Press to be onside, after all the press is their voice, so to speak.
Statute will not and can not stop the press from freedom of choice to choose which story or whose story to print or headline the front pages. If the press so desire to deny any political party a voice it will, or if the press should so desire to portray any political party in negative light it will, and it's no use demonstrating if you don't get any press.

If Hacked Off (mouthpiece of the Left Wing) thinks they have won the war over the press they are naive, they have won this battle...but the war is not over yet...not by a long haul.




aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 319
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Post by Angelique on 31.03.13 10:52

I see now why GM and Grant disappeared over the horizon. Didn't hang around to be interviewed.

Deal done and then disappear.

With all these supporters connected to Common Purpose maybe this was the connection in PdL?

____________________
Things aren't always what they seem

Angelique

Posts : 1396
Reputation : 37
Join date : 2010-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Post by aiyoyo on 31.03.13 11:17

The press is not interested in interviewing small fries like little Hugh and little Gerry. They will be gunning for the big fish in the pond hiding behind these two gullible people who were used as frontmen whether they realised it or not. The real big players behind Hacked off were politically motivated, which I dont think Hugh and Gerry were, but they'd their own agenda for wanting the Press regulated, and in representing their own interests they inadvertently became patsies for Hacked Off.




aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 319
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Post by plebgate on 31.03.13 13:05

http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/suffolk_former_councillor_convicted_of_being_drunk_in_charge_of_a_toddler_can_finally_be_named_1_1996894

Female labour councillor tried to keep the press quiet by taking out injunction.


In the article it is reported that the councillor tried to resign but the labour party said it was a personal matter.

I would like to know just how many injunctions are in place in Britain. No wonder they want to regulate the press. As I read on one of the blogs last week - much cheaper to silence the press with draconian laws than pay to keep injunctions in place.

plebgate

Posts : 5518
Reputation : 1251
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Press regulation talks 'break down' **UPDATE** Deal now done

Post by plebgate on 31.03.13 13:09

and I hope that any legal costs were met out of her own purse and not the taxpayers.

plebgate

Posts : 5518
Reputation : 1251
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 8 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum