The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Mm11

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Regist10
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Mm11

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Regist10

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns

View previous topic View next topic Go down

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Empty 'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns

Post by Guest 24.11.12 0:38

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns against 'changing the terms' despite having 'suffered' at the hands of the media




  • David Blunkett said there was no need to rush into legislation to ensure there is no repeat of the phone hacking scandal

  • The former Home Secretary has become the most senior Labour figure to speak out against statutory regulation of the Press



David Blunkett today becomes the most senior Labour figure yet to come out against statutory regulation of the Press.


Just days before the Leveson Inquiry is due to report, the former Home Secretary said there was no need to rush into legislation to ensure scandals such as phone hacking at the News of the World do not happen again.


He said that despite the fact he had ‘suffered’ at the hands of the media, he did not want to see anything that would ‘change the terms on which we have a free Press’.


The support for Press freedom from the former MP for Sheffield Brightside comes despite the fact that he resigned twice from Tony Blair’s cabinet following controversies in the media.







  • Comments come just days before the Leveson Inquiry is due to report



More on link............


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2237684/Why-shackle-press-Blunkett-warns-changing-terms-despite-having-suffered-hands-media.html#ixzz2D60Jr5Ea
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Empty Re: 'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns

Post by Guest 25.11.12 11:44

Foreign press warn over dangers of new UK media laws prior to Leveson report


Statutory controls would aid dictators abroad and send an 'appalling message', William Hague to be told by world body

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/24/foreign-press-warn-over-leveson
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Empty Re: 'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns

Post by Guest 25.11.12 12:39

Leveson: Hague declares support for press freedom as ruling due



Foreign Secretary William Hague says the government should "err on the side of freedom" when considering plans for press regulation.

Lord Justice Leveson, who has been inquiring into press standards, will make his recommendations on Thursday.

Evegeny Lebedev, owner of the Independent newspaper, also said he was "instinctively against" state regulation of the press.



More on link.......

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20485164
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Empty Re: 'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns

Post by aiyoyo 25.11.12 12:45

The end of Freedom of the Press equals to end of true democracy.

What's betting Leveson's decision will be taken in consultation with No. 10 behind closed doors, quite naturally, if you take into account who instigated the inquiry and who appointed Leveson to head it. And, how Cameron was given special privilege over other witnesses and treated as VIP throughout.
aiyoyo
aiyoyo

Posts : 9610
Activity : 10084
Likes received : 326
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Empty Re: 'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns

Post by Ribisl 25.11.12 13:21

We must remember that many of these people who are behind the move to curtail press freedom are the ones who had benefited most in the past in advancing their own agenda, be it their career or spreading (mis)information. Hypocrisy is never far behind their self-righteous indignation.

____________________
There is a taint of death, a flavour of mortality in lies... Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad
avatar
Ribisl

Posts : 807
Activity : 858
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2012-02-04

Back to top Go down

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Empty Re: 'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns

Post by Bob Southgate 25.11.12 18:36

I have no doubt that some antics of the press over the years have been outrageous, but what is needed is a press watchdog that has teeth. The current system is farcical. Express Group newspapers have withdrawn from the process and readers or those reported on have no redress against anything that they do. I would prefer a watchdog that can hold the papers to account when they step over the line but the press should still have the freedom to expose those who need exposing.
Bob Southgate
Bob Southgate

Posts : 161
Activity : 161
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2012-11-01
Age : 62

Back to top Go down

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Empty Re: 'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns

Post by Liz Eagles 25.11.12 18:39

No-one's had a go at the Law Society yet. Self-regulatory, self funded.
Liz Eagles
Liz Eagles

Posts : 10944
Activity : 13351
Likes received : 2216
Join date : 2011-09-03

Back to top Go down

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Empty Re: 'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns

Post by aiyoyo 25.11.12 19:26

aquila wrote:No-one's had a go at the Law Society yet. Self-regulatory, self funded.

Self-regulatory, YES. Self-funded, erm...I think funded by lawyers paying fees to maintain membership accounts.

Is there a watchdog body regulating them? There should be.
aiyoyo
aiyoyo

Posts : 9610
Activity : 10084
Likes received : 326
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Empty Re: 'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns

Post by Bob Southgate 26.11.12 0:48

aquila wrote:No-one's had a go at the Law Society yet. Self-regulatory, self funded.

Solicitors Regulatory Authority [cough]'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns 302873
Bob Southgate
Bob Southgate

Posts : 161
Activity : 161
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2012-11-01
Age : 62

Back to top Go down

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Empty Re: 'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns

Post by PeterMac 26.11.12 8:10

Where do you go to complain about an Ombdudsman ?
PeterMac
PeterMac
Investigator

Posts : 13583
Activity : 16577
Likes received : 2064
Join date : 2010-12-06

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns Empty Re: 'Why we must not shackle the press': Blunkett warns

Post by Woofer 26.11.12 11:00

Ribisl wrote:We must remember that many of these people who are behind the move to curtail press freedom are the ones who had benefited most in the past in advancing their own agenda, be it their career or spreading (mis)information. Hypocrisy is never far behind their self-righteous indignation.

Spot on.

A free press is the necessary balance to the covert antics of government and other powerful bodies. Without it, we`d be on the slippery slope to totalitarianism.

Its the non-availability of legal representation to the less well off that`s unjust. If it was, then the present laws would be sufficient.
Woofer
Woofer

Posts : 3390
Activity : 3508
Likes received : 14
Join date : 2012-02-06

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

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