AddThis SmartLayers

Industry hits out over press charter rejection

Newspaper industry bosses today reacted angrily to the government’s rejection of their plans for a new independent press regulator.

Culture secretary Maria Miller told MPs yesterday that a sub-committee of the Privy Council has thrown out the industry’s proposals for a Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) established by Royal Charter.

Ministers now want to implement a watered-down version of the original Royal Charter proposals agreed between the three main political parties and campaign group Hacked Off earlier this year.

However the attempts at compromise risk pleasing no-one with both the industry and campaign group Hacked Off attacking Ms Miller over the decision.

The industry steering group which includes the Newspaper Society as representatives of the regional press expressed deep disappointment with yesterday’s Commons announcement.

It said in a statement:  “We are deeply disappointed that the Privy Council sub committee has rejected our Charter proposal which set out criteria for tough and independent self-regulation with the support of virtually all of the newspaper and magazine industry.

“In his report, Lord Justice Leveson said: “What is required is independent self-regulation. By far the best solution to press standards would be a body, established and organised by the industry which would provide genuinely independent and effective regulation of its members…”

“It is impossible to see how a Royal Charter that has been written by politicians and the Hacked Off lobby group and is to be imposed by politicians could possibly meet Lord Justice Leveson’s recommendation.”

The steering group pointed out that Lord Justice Leveson had himself rejected the possibility of a recognition body established by Parliament or the Government without the industry’s backing.

He said in his report:  “One of the fundamental requirements for the regulatory body is independence from the Government. Any Parliamentary process would be likely to be perceived by the industry, and possibly the public, as Government interference in the independence of the press.”

The industry statement went on : “This proposed Royal Charter has already been universally rejected by the industry and it is even more regrettable that the industry will have no opportunity to take part in the discussions between the political parties over possible amendments.

“The Privy Council make it very clear that Royal Charter proposals are unlikely to succeed if they are the subject of controversy. Nothing could be more controversial than a Royal Charter imposed by politicians on an industry which is wholly opposed to it and which would fatally undermine freedom of expression.”

A leader in today’s Eastern Daily Press written by editor Nigel Pickover said the industry remained “under threat as never before.”

It said that the regional press had been exonerated by the Leveson Inquiry and that regional newspapers had been “swept headlong into an issue not of our making.”

“The day the first regional newspaper closes as a result of the Royal Charter, they will be bemoaning the loss of local democracy. And once lost, this would be hard to regain,” said the paper.

“This charter threatens the existence of many regional papers and, over the next few weeks, there is much to be worked out. We hope that the dialogue between press and politicians is open, and the voice of the regional press – untainted by scandals of phone hacking, hounding and bribes – is listened to.”

Interviewed on Radio 4 this morning, Society of Editors director Bob Satchwell added:  “It would be ridiculous to try to force something on an unwilling organisation. It would be unworkable.”

However in a separate interview, Actor and Hacked Off campaigner Hugh Grant made clear that no further compromise with the newspapers would be acceptable and described the latest moves as a “betrayal” of phone-hacking victims.


You can follow all replies to this entry through the comments feed.
  • October 9, 2013 at 10:13 am

    Either we have a free press or we don’t. You can’t have a partly free press as that’s a contradiction in terms. If people want restrictions on press freedom then that is how it will be. But it will come at a cost – the ability of journalists to find out about the likes of Harold Shipman, hushed up hospital death rates, MPs’ duck moat expenses etc. You can guarantee that politicians, the police and health/hospital/local authorities will seek to hide scandals from the public or prevent reporters from investigating them.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 9, 2013 at 11:24 am

    The big newspaper groups, with their slash and burn mentalities, are a far bigger threat,or at least as big a threat, to local newspapers than any legislation.
    And what kind of freedom is it the nationals want? The freedom to character assassinate anybody whose view disagrees with their own?
    The newspaper bosses have brought all this on themselves and yet again, it’s the staff on the ground who will suffer.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 9, 2013 at 5:51 pm

    ‘Freedom of the press’ in the hands of most of the nationals, unfortunately, tends to mean freedom to promote their own commercial and political interests. They are big business, with considerable lobbying power, little restraint and very little accountability.

    If we had a genuinely pluralist media, the cry of ‘press freedom’ would have much greater resonance.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 9, 2013 at 6:21 pm

    Freedom of speech is not a privilege conferred by politicians – it is a right that is the absolute bedrock of our society.
    The Leveson fiasco was triggered by parliamentary thieves and conmen. They wanted revenge and were supported by a group of people motivated entirely by vindictiveness.
    In a genuinely free society, press regulation is simply not on the agenda.
    It is up to newspapers to defy this move with every sinew at their disposal. Bad law should be resisted and made unworkable.
    If politicians are allowed to get their filthy hands on freedom of speech, what will be next – freedom of movement, freedom of association, freedom to breathe?

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 10, 2013 at 11:17 am

    Bad scientist is so far wide of the mark it’s frightening – when local papers fail, partly because of Leverson, what free press is he referring to? Facebook perhaps?

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)