Exam date

When's the 2016 exam? Wednesday 8th June, am.

Friday, 7 November 2014

Nov2014: Impress to rival IPSO, Guardian/Indie/FT in neither

Greenslade: unconvinced by 'new' regulator IPSO
A quick catch-up on the on-going post-Leveson mess that is press regulation (or perhaps more accurately Media Guardian articles:
the on-going absence of press regulation), with reference to three recent
  1. "Press regulation déjà vu: 'new' Ipso and the old PCC resemble each other" (Roy Greenslade);
  2. "Walter Merricks appointed chair of new independent monitor for the press" (Joshua Rozenberg, law expert);
  3. "Commission refuses to register press regulation funder as a charity" (Greenslade2).
Lets start with this from Greenslade2:
An attempt to create a charity to fund the independent press regulator Impress has been rejected. The Charity Commission refused to register an organisation called the Independent Press Regulation Trust (IPRT).
...

Launched in December 2013, the Impress project has the support of several leading journalists and writers, including Harold Evans, Michael Frayn, Polly Toynbee, David Hare, Ian McEwan, JK Rowling and Terry Gilliam.
It is viewed as an alternative to the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso), set up by the majority of newspaper and magazine publishers.
Several national titles, such as the Guardian, the Independent and the Financial Times, and magazines, such as Private Eye and The Economist, have not signed contracts to join Ipso. None of them, however, are thought to be keen on being regulated through a royal charter.

So...
  • IPSO has finally replaced the PCC
  • this is not what Leveson recommended!
  • he wanted a regulator more independent from the press, to be recognised through a royal charter
  • the press felt this a backdoor means of political interference/state control
  • even though many press arguments on press regulation are self-serving nonsense, this is an important point that should not be dismissed! 'Freedom of the press' is a basic of democratic norms
  • IPSO seems damnably similar to the PCC - using the same building, much of the same staff, similar relationship with its press paymasters, and an unchanged Editor's Code - plus none of the stronger measures Leveson (and Hacked Off) wanted to see
  • Three nationals have refused to sign up to IPSO: the Guardian, Indie and FT, plus several high-profile current affairs magazines such as Private Eye and The Economist
  • a rival organisation, claiming to better represent the public and victims of press intrusion or distortion, Impress, has now launched ... but its funding agency, the IPRT (Independent Press Regulation Trust), failed to receive the charitable status it probably needs to secure Royal Charter status
  • it claims to be 'Leveson-compliant' and crucially offers an arbitration service (see quote below)
  • ...there may still be a third rival regulator to come!

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments and suggestions are very welcome ... but please ensure all comments are appropriate! All comments are moderated before publication. Spam will be reported