I am in shock as I find
myself agreeing with David Cameron. It's an odd feeling and not one I
recommend but I feel I have to. Lord Leveson's report has been
published and people are looking for a solid outcome from the whole
nasty episode. Leveson makes a not unreasonable suggestion about a
voluntary self regulatory body with a carrot and stick system to
encourage editors and publishers to sign up. All very good, but why?
The press have a system of self regulation and the country has laws
to protect people against the lowest behaviour of the press. Those
laws are being demonstrated in the current court case against some of
the hacking scandals biggest culprits.
So where did the system
break down? Was it the laws not existing? Did news editors find some
loophole in the system and exploit it? No, they broke the law
(allegedly) and have been charged accordingly. Surely this is the
result, the blood the public are baying for? The system failed to
stop this practice soon enough, that bit is true, but it didn't fail
because the system to stop it wasn't in place, it failed because
individuals who were meant to safe guard that system had been
corrupted. Adding regulations to the press will not stop this
happening again as these regulations could be as easily ignored as
the current ones were, as could any law until the legal system
catches up with you. A system to safeguard whistle-blowers and
monitor the relationship between the press, government and the police
is needed but not more regulation.
When someone breaks the
law and gets away with it you don't change the law, you change the
investigative system, review safeguards and systems of protection.
The law remains, adding more laws does nothing to prevent others from
breaking the original law. Enforce the current laws properly, don't
introduce new ones.
All that said the
report is very careful not to suggest much beyond a voluntary self
regulatory system. So where's the issue? As far as the nuts and bolts there is not much
of one but in the wonderful world of spin and a knee jerk tabloid
press there is a big one as the reality won't be reported. Instead it
will be, and already has been, all about the government regulating
of the press. An issue that any fan of press freedoms should be wary of but not one that the suggestions in this report really affect. There is no government regulation or legal obligation to follow the self regulation suggested, it's all very nicey nice.. And here's where I do not agree with Cameron, his
comments on the report do nothing to dispel the notion that there is more to it then this but instead
reinforce them. It's a dangerous suggestion that has implications all
over the world. The bastion of press freedom introduces press
regulations. For propaganda purposes it adds weight to leaders who
look less favourably on civil liberties and press freedoms.
Ironically, the
recommended regulations will go no way towards stopping the sort of
reporting that allows the press to hide the facts behind
scaremongering.
So when all is said and
done the current law is protection enough, it just needs to be
enforced properly, but if the suggestions made by Leveson are
brought in nothing much will change with the UK press. However its
image across the globe will be permanently affected and for that
reason the lesser of two evils in this case is not to implement
Leveson's suggestions on regulation but to punish those responsible
for breaking the current laws.
