Newspaper regulation: blog tasks

 Task One: Media Magazine article and questions

1) Keith Perch used to edit the Leicester Mercury. How many staff did it have at its peak and where does Perch see the paper in 10 years' time?

When Keith began his career, newspapers were at their peak. Regional newspapers had hundreds of thousands of readers – and there were no websites to worry about. Where does he see a paper like The Mercury, which once employed 130 journalists, in ten years time? Perch thinks that if it is still in print, it will be weekly, extremely expensive, and have a very small circulation; if it is online only – the likeliest outcome – it will be unlikely to make money, and so would employ as few as five or six staff.

2) How does Perch view the phone hacking scandal?

The biggest single issue is that something illegal was going on which obviously should not have been, and which wasn’t dealt with by the police, and unfortunately the resulting actions have been disproportionate [...] Far too many newspapers and magazines have been caught up in a regulatory system that they shouldn’t really be caught up in [...] A small section of the press was behaving in a totally unacceptable way, but it should have been dealt with legally. I don’t think regulation is the answer. I know many people point to Leveson and the fact he held a massive inquiry, but I don’t think he looked carefully enough at what is happening in the regional press or in small weekly  papers. I think his form of regulation is unacceptable, and that actually what people really want to do is ‘tame’ the press.

3) What does IPSO stand for and how does it work?

So how does IPSO work? A newspaper has 28 days to deal with a complaint. If it hasn’t been

resolved, the complainant can then take it to the IPSO Complaints Committee, which will decide if

the Editor’s Code of Practice has been broken. If it has, the Committee can insist on corrections and demand that they be placed on a particular page. Keith sits above the Complaints Committee

on the board which decides how the code should be interpreted. He can also investigate the overall standards of a particular newspaper. 

4) What is Perch's view of newspaper ownership?

Keith does not believe that businesses such as Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, which owns The Sun, Th e Times and 39% of Sky, should be forced to sell some of their titles to ensure that no one person or company can control too much of the media industry and therefore control the agenda: Ultimately if people wanted to, they could buy The Guardian or The Mirror and just

ignore The Sun. But they don’t, they buy The Sun! Rupert Murdoch is as entitled to his say as you or I. There are a million different voices online but everyone chooses to listen to the views in print – The Daily Mail’s website is far far bigger than anybody else’s little blog or point of view. It’s not The Daily Mail’s fault if that’s what people choose to read. What I really struggle with is that the Left are effectively trying to say people who read The Sun are stupid, and I don’t understand that.

It’s trying to control what people read.

5) Do you agree with his view that broadcast news should have less regulation so that TV channels can support particular political parties or people?

I think the reason for demanding that broadcasters are balanced or neutral is based in history and to do with the fact that there were virtually no channels or multiple broadcasters. And now there

are so many that if I want to choose to listen to a right-wing or left-wing broadcaster then I think I should be allowed to, rather than have to listen to supposedly ‘balanced’ broadcasters. I understand why in regulation terms that existed in the past, but I don’t really understand why that exists today.

Task Two: Newspaper regulation exam question



What are the arguments for and against statutory regulation of the newspaper industry? [20 marks]

The complex and protracted discussion over whether or not newspapers should be subject to statutory regulation has been going on for a while. PPC lacked any legal authority. Due to the fact that the newspaper editor was essentially in charge of it, there was a great deal of criticism. The newspaper was only required to publish a brief apology after the regulator decided against them, which meant that no one saw it and it was of no use.

The Leveson Inquiry was conducted in 2011–2012 as a result of the Milly Dowler phone hacking incident in 2007 and the "News of the World" closure in 2011. Hundreds of witnesses were included in the 2,000-page study; they included victims like Sally Dowler as well as those at the top of the hierarchy like Hugh Grant and Rupert Murdoch. In the wake of the Leveson investigation, the IPSO was established as a new news press regulation. The IPSO has way more authority then the PCC, implementing regulations. Crucially, though, it does not implement Leveson's important suggestion that the regulator be supported by government regulation. Furthermore Impress, a different regulator, was established.

The Milly Dowler phone hacking incident was an invasion of privacy that misled her family into believing she was still alive. The Dowlers were treated completely unfairly and inhumanely, and this was just the newspapers a vile method of fabricating a larger narrative and making more money. The News of the World would have been penalised and required to publish an apology on their front pages if there had been statutory regulation in place at the time. This means that justce would of been served for the poor girls family . The school girl's family suffered extra pain as a result of these journalists' acts, which also put an existing police investigation in jeopardy. This shows that statutory regulations should be put in place to prevent situations that traumatise people from happening. 

On the other hand, others might counter that there is no need for statutory regulation because of all these cases. Any actions akin to the phone hacking scandal are prohibited. Accordingly, the police will handle the situation. Far too many newspapers and magazines have become entangled in a regulatory framework that they shouldn't have been, according to Keith Perch. If there were legislative regulations, this would all be true.All the other newspapers would have to pay the price for one newspaper's unfair acts. It is crucial to remember that a free press is necessary for a free and democratic society, and that statutory restriction does not accomplish this.

In conclusion, I think the newspaper sector be subject to statutory regulation. Even though there have been some illegal cases in the past, the government and police will of handled these.  Furthermore, by paying attention to the opinions of the British people, the British press has demonstrated that it isn't capable of self-regulating its ethical standards which was seen in the Milly Dowler case and many more. Since newspapers would not be able to survive without their readers, the newspaper industry will always have to act in their best interests.