There's no need for new laws or powers to tell us what we can write

“One point I missed off. The Hull Daily Mail has been brilliant at righting the wrongs its made, and I am confident any new laws or proceedures will have no effect on this paper”

“I think the papers have abused their dominent position in the debate on press freedom.

I havent seen one comment against imposition of some form of press restriction that has not been based on a personal attack on Hugh Grant. And this without offering him the right of reply to the press using its predominent position to attack with out fear of retaliation.

They have used the indiscretion he committed in another country, many years ago, that was widely reported in the international press and for which he was prosecuted.

So can some one tell why he would blame the press for intrusion when everyone knew what he had done.

It is not the reporting of his problems that he objects too, its the uncontrolled interference into the most basic of victims privacy that is the problem with the press. Not just the well known, no one has been safe.

Reading of the suicide of a sex change teacher who has recently committeed suicide as, it is said, because of the hounding and unfair attack he got from that mongral, Littlejohn in the Mail. Even now it appears too much for newspapers to act sensibly in the chase for a headline and currently facing condemnation because of their previous actions.

There was nothing wrong in a person changing sex, Littlejohn attacked him digracefully because he was a male teacher as if that was any different to a docker having a sex change.

I believe the reason they did what they did and want to continue as before is fairly simple.

They did what they did, because they could and if anyone complained to them, tough, if they complained to the PCC they where toothless and run by the press barons anyhow .

No editor would upset another in fear of the gentemens arrangement not to attack eadch other breaking down.

I have for the first time actually have praise for Sullivan who owns the Express and other papers.
He refuses to join the PCC because, he says, they are toothless.

Had the PCC had just the most basic sense, they would have at east once or twice looked as if they had some care for others being attacked, but the editors were so filled with their own importance and arragence, they could not even allow that.
Im sorry, the Press have done some much for so long, without check, penalties are the ony option now.
Its like a persistant criminal who keeps getting warned that the next time is the last time and never got stopped, they think they are immune and continue unti they finish up doing a ong stretch.

Well the long stetch has arrived.


That weak argument that phone tappinjg was illegal and would not have been stopped under the new system is false.
Reporters phone tapped because they thought they were so powerful they were immune to prosecution and many seem to forget, when it was reported to the PCC, they aso covered it up with that ridiculous comment fed them by the editors of it being a rougue reporter.

As for reporters at these papers, they must have known what was going on but did nothing.

So I am sorry, I dont ike restrictions on the press, but the alternative of letting you police your selves, has failed dramatically .”

“Sorry, but you both couldn't be more wrong. It isn't solely driven by celebrities, the media are trying to make out it is to divert attention away from the other victims of press intrusion, the McCanns and The Dowlers to name a few.

I care. The press need regulating. It's not regulation per se that journalists are afraid of, it's independent regulation. Would you ok with Bob Diamond and friends being in charge of the Financial Services Authority? No, of course not. The press have been marking their own homework for far too long, ie the PCC which is manned by newspaper editors. Talk about conflict of interests.

Broadcast media falls under the jurisdiction of OFCOM. If OFCOM functioned by the same standards of the PCC, then every single complaint about 'Sachsgate' would've have been binned unless Andrew Sachs himself had complained.That's how it works, it won't entertain complaints unless it directly affects you in some way. The PCC rules state that a correction should be given as much prominence as the original offending article. The only time this has ever happened was when the court forced them to. Every other correction for a frontpage article has been a footnote buried in the paper somewhere.

Independent regulation is long overdue. Without it, the press can and do publish what they like with impunity, such as the relentless character assassination of Christopher Jefferies for example.

You probably haven't heard of the World Press Freedom Index. It's an annual ranking of countries based on their press freedom. Second from bottom at number 178 is North Korea. Top of the list for the last 4 years has been Finland, a country which has independent press regulation underpinned by statute. The UK is currently 29th, its lowest position in 11 years (the highest it's ever been is 19th), so you cannot claim the UK press would be less free with independent regulation.

Finally Ian, if you're going to claim "I'm not entirely sure I've got my head around all of the complexities..." then you're hardly in a position to make a worthwhile analysis of the situation are you?”

“I couldn't agree with you more about the over reaction of the government on this issue, largely driven by celebrities and the politicians themselves.
But I do disagree with you about the general public not caring about it. Many would miss the pleasure of seeing celebrities' and politicians' dirty washing exposed.
And, I'm sure a majority of people do understand and would fight for a free press, if they were asked that is!”