Press in the UK

[Albie]

I used to think Hugh Grant was a enjoyable person to see as he plays a posh buffoon on film time and time again.

Now I see him as a complete prat that wants to stifle media in the UK.

http://order-order.com/2013/03/16/hacked-offs-blackmail-letter-to-miliband/

Fact of the matter is that we have laws in the UK to stop phones been hacked, to stop slander and to stop harassment. They are just not enforced because the press, the police and the politicians are all in each others pockets. What Hugh Grant wants is a press regulation with statutory under-pinning. A supposedly independent regulatory body with MP's setting the rules.

And it won't just stop with the paper press - news bloggers aiming at a UK audience.

http://order-order.com/2013/03/17/g...-charter-aiming-for-guido-theyll-get-you-too/

A free press may be a thing of the past in the UK this time tomorrow. But that could just be the beginning. What next? Speech?

 

[Brigantium]

Anti-press sentiment is another populist movement of the moment, it's a handy diversion tactic to stop politicians being in the line of fire right now, and TV and radio are enjoying the chance to get stuck into written media (both print and online) as old rivals.

I think there are already laws to deal with most of this, although I'd like to see payments for stories to stop (except for payments to freelances etc). If someone has something to say in the public interest, they shouldn't need to be paid £2k+ to say it.
I'm very worried about the prospect of a blanket ban on whistle-blowing by public servants. If their concern is genuinely a matter of public concern, and they aren't paid to tell the story, they shouldn't face prosecution.

The press is already restricted, particularly by libel laws and laws surrounding court and legal proceedings. Courts can make on-the-spot rulings on what they consider to be Contempt of Court, within certain loose guidelines. Similarly, anyone can sue a publication for telling the truth, if the publication doesn't have enormously conclusive evidence or has the evidence but can't afford to defend the case.

There are things I'd like to change about some elements of national press in particular. Of course, if the public want to discourage poor practice in the press, they can avoid buying any publication known for gossip, snooping and sensationalism. Ironically, these papers and magazines are the bestselling ones, and they're not hard to spot!

 

[Albie]

If someone has something to say in the public interest, they shouldn't need to be paid £2k+ to say it.

Absolutely. But...

Of course, if the public want to discourage poor practice in the press, they can avoid buying any publication known for gossip, snooping and sensationalism. Ironically, these papers and magazines are the bestselling ones, and they're not hard to spot!

...that is generally reserved to this type of press. Don't like them publishing this stuff, don't buy them - as you say. Example - how does The Sun sell in Liverpool?

I'm very worried about the prospect of a blanket ban on whistle-blowing by public servants. If their concern is genuinely a matter of public concern, and they aren't paid to tell the story, they shouldn't face prosecution.

Again, agreed.