In The Digital Order, Is Freedom Of The Press Obsolete?

Michael Hedges December 3, 2012 - Follow on Twitter

Freedom of the press has endured, as a legal concept, for nearly five hundred years when kings were stopped from seizing printing presses. Much has changed since then. The press is sophisticated and a big business, though both diminishing under the digital roar. Perhaps the legal language needs attention.

The UK media sector, the nation’s politicians and watchers of them all came to a respectful and unnatural pause as Lord Justice Brian Leveson intoned his conclusions of a near year long inquiry into practices and ethics of newspapers. Within in moments the raucous instinct returned, challenging virtually all of the report’s one million words.  Even that lasted but a day or so; the news cycle moved on, attention drifting as it does.

Most attention was given to the highly contentious concept of government regulating newspapers. Self-regulation measures in place during the time of ethical lapses and alleged criminality “completely failed,” Lord Justice Leveson concluded. Tougher rules are necessary, he said, backed up by law and threat of punishment because those newspaper people just cannot be trusted.

“There have been too many times when,” said the jurist, “chasing the story, parts of the press have acted as if its own code, which it wrote, simply did not exist. This has caused real hardship and, on occasion, wreaked havoc with the lives of innocent people whose rights and liberties have been disdained.”

From newspaper proprietors, editors, writers and columnists the response ranged from abject horror among the most right-wing to wariness among the center-left leaning at any proposal to inscribe newspaper regulation into law. Freedom of the press – meaning guaranteed separation between government and newspaper owner’s right to print what they like – would be further enshrined in UK law by new regulations, said Lord Justice Leveson.  The most strident critics heard riders approaching carrying into newsrooms across the land the swords of dictators.

As they are wont to do, politicians rushed (and gushed) to posture themselves appropriately, according to their natural constituencies. Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron said he has “serious concerns and misgivings” about legislating the behavior of newspaper proprietors, rejecting new regulations for newspaper publishers. Labour Party shadow chancellor and political opponent Ed Balls urged lawmakers to “get on and do it.” Mr. Cameron established the Leveson Inquiry in response to the phone hacking scandal that engulfed the now shuttered tabloid News Of The World.

Lord Justice Leveson concluded that a new independent body, replacing the self-regulating Press Complaints Commission, be formed by law with newspaper proprietors voluntary compliance to a set of ethical standards and punishment for the errant. The new body would have investigative powers. Newspaper proprietors choosing to remain outside the new self-regulatory regime would report to broadcast and telecoms regulator OFCOM. Noted widely were the obvious contradictions. The proposed arbitration system with its incentive for newspaper publishers to participate is a stroke of genius.

As significant, if not more so, was the Leveson Inquiry’s exploration of UK newspaper culture and practices, not that surprises came to light. It’s a rough and tumble business run by tough people of single purpose. It also walks right up to the wild side, sometimes sliding into it; phone hacking undertaken by more than one rogue reporter, as claimed by News Of The World owner News International. “This is not just the famous but ordinary members of the public, caught up in events… many of them, truly tragic… far larger than they could cope with but made much, much worse by press behavior that, at times can only be described as outrageous, said Lord Justice Leveson, judiciously avoiding any language that might prejudice forthcoming criminal trials. Those aggrieved by News Of The World phone hacking, from normally limelight enabled celebrities to common citizens thrust into it, resoundingly welcomed the Leveson Inquiry report, called for action from lawmakers and expressed disappointment in PM Cameron’s apparent rejection of the primary findings.

In the end, when there is one, the UK newspaper industry, along with politicians, will argue the Leveson Inquiry proposals into the dustbin of all good intentions. While a constituency exists for greater scrutiny, as it does for the banking sector, legal language protecting press freedom, proprietor’s interests and aggrieved citizens all at once does not exist. There will, however, come a day when digital media makes printer’s ink obsolete and with it the language of the past.

See also in ftm Knowledge

Press/Media Freedom - Challenges and Concerns

Press and media freedom worldwide is facing challenges from many corners. As authoritarian leaders impose strict control over traditional and new media with impunity, media watchers have concerns for democracy. This ftm Knowledge file accounts the troubles of this difficult decade. 88 pages. PDF (December 2011)

Order here