To understand Leveson you really need to grasp the lessons of history - and there are striking parallels between Leveson, which is set to lead to a new self-regulator under some threat of statutory regulation if the press doesn't clean up its act, and Calcutt, which was ... basically the same in this regard. Both were set up after public outrage over tabloid excesses, with privacy issues to the fore. Both were set up with the existing press self-regulator, then the Press Council, now the PCC (although its chairman Lord Hunt announced its intention to replace itself back in December 2011), widely seen as having failed.
Indeed, both could/should have been replaced earlier if there was political will: the 3rd Royal Commission was scathing of the PC, whilst Calcutt's 1993 review strongly recommended statutory regulation be brought in. A weak Labour government in 1977 was no more willing than a weak Conservative government in 1993 to attract the damaging hostility of most of the press (although Labour could arguably have taken the chance as most of the right-wing press was very hostile anyway).
If we roll on to 2013, we once more see a weak government, at least the majority Conservative part of it, resisting pressure from the other parties to carry out the recommendations on press regulation, calculating that this will lose them vital press support needed for the 2015 general election. Indeed, since PM Cameron came out against many of Leveson's recommendations, carried in his initial November 2012 report, he has seen negative right-wing press coverage flip, with Cameron hailed as a hero safeguarding democratic values.
Its worth noting here that you shouldn't judge an argument's merits purely by its source! There is an important principle at stake, though it is arguable that freedom of the press is only meaningful if the nature (therefore the regulations around (concentration of) ownership and proprietorial interference) of the press is fundamentally altered.
Here's some links for further reading:
Not a link: Curran and Seaton cover this!!!!
Indie article from 1993 by Maggie Brown and Michael Leapman - possibly the best of its kind, you get both the history plus searing analysis of the backdrop and relationship between press and politicians.
Guardian obit on David Calcutt.
Incisive 1990 article from Index on Censorship.
PCC Wiki, incorporates the history.
Resources and analysis on the topic of media regulation, particularly for the A2 Media exam, Section B. Major case studies include the film industry, music video and the press, with major players such as Murdoch, OfCom and the government considered. If using materials from this blog, please credit the source - Dave Burrowes, Media Studies @ St George's School
Exam date
Some key posts and resources
- 2019 and earlier IPSO cases
- 2021 overview
- BBFC historic bans, subjective judgement?
- BBFC Human Centipede 2
- BBFC overview essay style writing
- BBFC overview with vids
- BBFC U/PG cases Postman Pat--Paddington--Watership Down
- Daily Mail IPSO google
- EU press flak
- IPSO arbitration fines scheme
- IPSO children rulings
- IPSO PCC arguments FOR
- Murdoch flak/conc of ownership
- MUSIC RACISM drill musicians criminalised
- Press reg history (website)
- Privacy 2018 summary
- Social media alt to IPSO?
- Social media as alt reg/FAANGS power up to early 2019
- StopFundingHate
- Tabloid Corrections
- Telegraph libel payout AFTER IPSO ruling unsatisfactory
- The Rock Daily Star Insta
Wednesday, 24 April 2013
1989 Calcutt Committee: parallels with Leveson today
Labels:
Calcutt,
Conservative,
David Cameron,
Labour,
Leveson,
PCC,
privacy
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
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