LEVESON INQUIRY:CULTURE, PRACTICE AND ETHICS OF THE PRESS
"I want this inquiry to mean something", not end up as "footnote in some professor of journalism's analysis of 21 century history." LJ Leveson in reply to A Rusbridger's submission to Inquiry. |
| Lord Justice Leveson |
Here's a quick reminder of the four modules within this first year of the inquiry.
Module 1: The relationship between the press and the public and looks at phone-hacking and other potentially illegal behaviourModule 2: The relationships between the press and police and the extent to which that has operated in the public interest
Module 3: The relationship between press and politiciansModule 4: Recommendations for a more effective policy and regulation that supports the integrity and freedom of the press while encouraging the highest ethical standards.
Witness list for this week (23rd - 26th January) to be found HERE
Video Recordings of each day's proceedings HERE
Live Feed From Leveson Inquiry Site HERE
BBC Democracy Live Feed HERE
Guardian Live Blog
Telegraph Live Blog
BBC News Leveson Inquiry Page
#Leveson Twitter Feed
Dan Sabbagh (Guardian Journalist) Twitter timeline
Ben Fenton (Journalist FT) live Leveson tweets and comments
Live Blog - Hacking Inquiry - Hacked Off
Hackinginquiry on Twitter (Hacked Off)
Tim Bradshaw - FT Digital Media Correspondent on Twitter - @tim
Telegraph Live Blog
BBC News Leveson Inquiry Page
#Leveson Twitter Feed
Dan Sabbagh (Guardian Journalist) Twitter timeline
Ben Fenton (Journalist FT) live Leveson tweets and comments
Live Blog - Hacking Inquiry - Hacked Off
Hackinginquiry on Twitter (Hacked Off)
Tim Bradshaw - FT Digital Media Correspondent on Twitter - @tim
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today's links to articles, info and comments relevant to the Leveson Inquiry (frequently updated) :
- Times Reporter Told Bosses He Had Hacked Email Before High Court Case - Guardian Media
- Jonathan King Applies For 'Core Participant' Status - Guardian Media
- The Leveson Inquiry is the Enemy of a Free Press - Mick Hume - Spiked
- BBC Complaints System Under the Microscope at Leveson Inquiry - Full Fact
- Plight of Regional Press is Cause For Concern - PA Editor - Hold the Front Page
- Clare Short: I Didn't Get Rid of Page 3 - Can Leveson? - Independent
- News of the World: 110% Certainty, the Remainder Fact - Bloggerheads
- Jon Slattery: Independent: 'Press Face New Wave of Legal Action if Operation Motorman Victims Are Named'.
- Independent article named in Jon Slattery's blogpiece.
- http://hackinginquiry.org/news/hacked-off-letter-to-information-commissioner/
IC refers to letter sent by @hackinginquiry and says not necessary to contact all individuals mentioned in Motorman files. #Leveson
- Christopher Graham, Information Commissioner at Leveson Inquiry - Storify - via @Selkie - from Hacking Inquiry - Hacked Off
- BBC News - Leveson Inquiry Hears Data Laws 'Breached Every Day'
- Information Commissioner Quizzed On Data Protection At Leveson Inquiry - Free Speech Blog
- Libel, Leveson and Riots Blamed For UK Press Freedom Fall - Press Gazette
- Info Chief: Not Practical to Contact Press Blagging Targets - Press Gazette
- Facebook More Pub Than Publishing, Leveson Told - Free Speech Blog
- TV Psychic Sally Morgan Sues Daily Mail For Defamation - Press Gazette
- Liam Fox Told He Was a Target of Phone-hacking - Guardian Media
- Leveson Suggests Facebook Should Be Regulated Differently From Papers - Guardian Media
- No New Evidence of Newspapers Getting Information Illegally, Says Regulator - Guardian Media
27th January:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday January 26th 2012
(Link to page for Day 31 HERE)
Today's Witnesses:
Richard Allan (Facebook)
David-John Collins (Google)
Christopher Graham (ICO)
Daphne Keller (Google)
Camilla Wright (Popbitch) 
Associated Newspapers will not appeal the ruling against their bid to bar anonymous evidence at #leveson
Richard Allan (Facebook)
 |
| Richard Allan |
3 000 people work for Facebook worldwide.
Monarchy made use of Facebook during last year's wedding celebrations.
Smiles raised as Mr Barr explains status updates and pokes on Facebook
Some degree of awe at #Leveson that more than one in every 2 Brits are using Facebook (30m users, over-13s only)
More than 50% of over 13s in UK is on Facebook
Privacy:
Allan: - Core raison d'etre of Facebook is the sharing of people's private information with the user being in full control of their information.
Barr now discussing FTC Report on Facebook Privacy.
Barr is quoting Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, saying privacy is no longer a social norm.
Guardian Live Blog:
Barr reads from a January 2010 Guardian article titled "Privacy no longer a social norm, says Facebook founder".
Allan says that Facebook's express purpose is to allow people to connect and share information with one each other.
"It's very much about what you wish to share with a group with which you wish to share it," he adds.
Like Google, Facebook tries to comply as a matter of policy with the laws of the lands where it operates.
Allan: We have specific clauses on bullying and harassment, nudity and pornography, violence and hate speech.
Facebook T&Cs allow it to remove content "way beyond" the illegal into other forms regarded as unsuitable for a general audience.
Now #leveson getting into real identity issue on Facebook. Allan says this is at the core of what Facebook has done, reason for success
Allan of Facebook at #leveson : FB's been so successful because people have to use their real identities
Facebook has a security team but the strongest protection is its community of users. "We have an 800m strong neighbourhood watch."
Allan of Facebook at #leveson : rare experience to come across problematic material on Facebook
Facebook has a security team but the strongest protection is its community of users. "We have an 800m strong neighbourhood watch."
Allan: We have a system of social reporting. Feature allows reporting to be sent to a third-party, or on to FB and we can remove.
Allan: We offer service to people who don't use FB, so they can come back on posted material about themselves.
Facebook technically can restrict access to piece of content based on who is using it, if it's legal in one country but not another
Guardian Live Blog:
Allan says that most of the complaints to Facebook about content on the site are resolved by reference to the social network's terms of service.Facebook technically can restrict access to a piece of content based on who is viewing it, Allan says, if it is legal in one country but not another.
Allan: There is a form on Facebook to report illegal content, including copyright, trademark, libel and privacy issues.
Facebook deals with claims there is defamatory material on the site in 24-48 hours
Allan: The ability to copy digital material instantaneously does represent a new set of challenges.
From Telegraph Live Blog:
14.38 While Facebook's Lord Allan is explaining how the site complies with laws in the country of origin, Digital Media Editor Emma Barnett argues users should be able to be forgotten online. She writes:
New EU laws announced yesterday, which mean social networking sites and companies will be forced to delete inaccurate or embarrassing information about people online should be applauded.
But they still don’t go far enough and solve what is the even bigger issue – how to control what other people write about you online.
The digital right to be forgotten, as EU Commissioner for Justice, Viviane Reding’s campaign has become known, is something all web users should be striving for, even if they haven’t realised the importance of such a right yet.
Allan says people should be able to speak freely on Facebook as long as they do so within the rules
Guardian Live Blog:
Allan says that Facebook users are content with their information being shared among friends on that site, but object to it being republished by newspapers.Barr asks about how this would play with a new UK media regulator.
"It would be important to distinguish editorialised published content from what you might call chatter on the internet," Allan says.
Facebook says it would have concerns about proportionality of a regulator that made judgements on "internet chatter".
Richard Allan advises caution on the thresholds Lord Justice
Allan: Once the media have taken a photo from FB and copied it elsewhere, there's nothing we can do to recover it
Once people have copied content from Facebook nothing FB can do (Allan talking about Dunblane story)
Allan: trying to regulate what people say on Facebook wd be like trying to regulate what people say in the pub
From Guardian Live Blog:
Lord Justice Leveson tells Allan that one of the issues the inquiry is grappling with is how traditional media are impacted by social media.
David-John Collins (Google)
 |
| D-J Collins |
On another hot issue, the incident last week which saw Facebook revealed as having tried to plant negative stories about Google, Mr Schmidt refused to be drawn.
"Ask Facebook about Facebook, ask Google about Google," was all he'd say. Luckily, his amiable European director of communications DJ Collins intervened: "If I suggested we did something like that, I'd be fired," he said. Phew, thought the assembled hacks, we've got our quote. Thanks, DJ.
D. Keller and D-J Collins are to give their evidence jointly.
Daphne Keller's Witness Statement in Full
Now at #leveson : Google (David-John Collins comms & public affs chief for Europe, MidEast, Africa & Daphne Keller, their top lawyer)
Collins maintains privacy settings on Google are controlled by the user, not Google.
Google Privacy Centre
Google Privacy Policy is Subject of Backlash - Bloomberg Business
From Guardian Live Blog:
Keller and Collins are being asked by David Barr, junior counsel to the inquiry, about an article on the Register website that quoted Google's former chief executive, Eric Schmidt, of saying: "only miscreants worry about net privacy".Collins says that the headline is not representative of Google's privacy principles, which it takes "extremely seriously".
He says that Google offers transparency, choice and control over privacy.
From Guardian Live Blog:
Collins says that Google has a "regular dialogue" with privacy groups and data protection controllers because it wants the benefit of their wisdom.Barr asks about the Google Street View incident when the internet giant mistakenly collected private Wi-Fi data.
Collins says that the company regrets the incident and has since made significant internal changes, including setting up an internal privacy policy group headed by a director.
Collins talks about Google's contentious new privacy policy, unveiled earlier this week.He says that user feedback told Google they wanted a more simple policy – it had 70 separate policies covering different products.
Barr points out that Google has different domains – such as google.co.uk and google.com – and they under different jurisdictions.
He attempts to explain how Google's search works, saying that the search giant crawls other websites for relevant pages.
"I'm not sure about the word 'crawling', given the speed at which it operates," quips Leveson.
Keller is asked about the differences between Google US and UK, and the indexing system for collecting search results.
Guardian Live Blog:
Keller is explaining Google's takedown process.She says Google has a "cache removal rool" and that it is important for the search engine to adhere to requests by webmasters to not index their websites.
Google has its "ears open everywhere to pick up complaints," Keller says.
Keller: We honour court orders and process removals. Takes us out of "he said, she said" (says Eady J has ruled on such a case).
Guardian Live Blog:
Barr points out that if defamatory material is removed from Google.co.uk search results, it may remain available for UK users to view via Google.com.Keller says that is correct, assuming the material does not violate US law.
Keller: a defamatory case removed from UK search results (.co.uk) still appear in US results (.com) if complies with US law
Keller: Google has removed 100s of URLs in relation to Mosley. He did the right thing in going to individual sites also.
Keller, Google: we've removed hundreds of URLs in relation to the Max Mosley case
Keller: There is a fast track system for copyright claims. We are faster at dealing with privacy and libel because of this.
Keller describes database of removal requests. Documents legitimate uses of law and where it is being misused to remove material.
Google sends copies of all takedown requests to Chilling Effects site, with sender info removed.
Barr points out 65 requests for removal had 82% compliance rate last year. Privacy features heavily.
Collins: We would comply with UK law (in terms of future press regulation). We prefer to use court judgments for removal decisions.
From Guardian Live Blog:
Barr asks the Google duo what weight the internet firm would attach to a new media regulator in the UK that regulated newspapers' online content and could ask for material to be removed.
Collins says he does not want to get into speculating over regulation, but would look for the same "robustness" as from court orders.
"I would want to have a very serious think about that," he says.
Guardian Live Blog:
Collins stresses Keller's point that "Google is not the internet" and adds that there are multiple entry points to the internet.Leveson takes this point on board and says takedown requests may need "somewhat more authoritative backing" in order to succeed.
He asks if in future the executives will give a provisional response to his provisional thinking on the issue.
The judge says he hopes such a system would be fair, fully compliant with the right to be heard, and comported to rules bounded in privacy, freedom of expression and so on.
Barr asks about Google-owned service Blogger.com.Keller says the same notice and takedown process applies as with the search site, but Google hosts the site's servers so it takes down offending content itself.
Barr asks about Google News. Cooper explains how it works, stressing that the search giant is not producing the stories itself.Keller is warns about "over-breadth" of regulation on internet searching that can arise out of good intentions.The pair are asked about Google Images.Keller says images are handled with the same takedown process as for general search.
Keller says she cannot recall a time when a request from a media regulator has formed the basis of removals.
Google urges
Google's Keller arguing internet has self regulatory traditions, eg metatags
Collins: We don't think the internet should just be self-regulated but it is important.
Google talking about self regulation at #Leveson. "We see ourselves as a very responsible company" because work with IWF, ASA.
Guardian Live Blog:
Financial Times digital media correspondent Tim Bradshaw has just tweeted this quote from Lord Justice Leveson:
#Leveson: Blogger has "half a trillion words and 250k words added every minute... One would understand why you can't read it all." lols
Daphne Keller (Google)
 |
| Daphne Keller |
Christopher Graham (ICO)
 |
| Christopher Graham |
Witness Statement #2
What Price Privacy? - ICO
What price Privacy Now? - ICO
Graham: I had to brief myself on key issues when I applied for role. I had conversations with Thomas (former IC). #Leveson
Graham: There was a "sword of Damocles" hanging over the press in 2009. Had a wake-up call over Nick Davies Guardian coverage. #Leveson
Graham: Phone and email hacking not in ICO remit, but S55 (data breaching) is.
Guardian Live Blog:
Graham is asked about the handover from Richard Thomas, the former information commissioner whose time in office saw the publication of What Price Privacy? and What Price Privacy Now?He says the illegal trade of data by newspapers uncovered by those reports was not a priority when he took office.
"I can't say it was top of the list. I can't say it was a priority," he tells the inquiry, adding that the Freedom of Information Act demanded more attention.
Graham: frustrating not being able to deal with real challenge b/c constantly met by press saying "sky is falling". Really isn't #leveson
Info Commissioner says he told the press in 2009 - "it's so not about you"
Info Commissioner : Google privacy policy change is "huge" #leveson
Guardian Live Blog:
Graham is asked about search agencies, and whether the ICO is aware of them.He says some newspapers use agencies to obtain ex-directory numbers, but it may not be unlawful to hold such information oon databases.
Graham says he was not aware that Associated Newspapers was still using Steve Whittamore's private eye firm as recently as 2010 until it was admitted to the inquiry.Graham says there are ongoing investigations into private investigators, but declines to give more information.
Graham: I wasn't convinced by newspapers' evidence that information obtained by Whittamore illegally can be found online legally.
Info Commissioner : I don't know anything about Whittamore's business except what I heard at inquiry last week
Graham: Not my responsibility to start probing without evidence of continued misbehaviour (in relation to Whittamore).
Jay suggests Info Comsnr is leaving it to the consumer to deal with search agencies
Leveson asks how a consumer will know whether their private details are being bandied about. Graham says he has compalints from people who believe their details are in the public domain. Can get that corrected. Has had power since 2010 to levy large fine on those breaking the privacy code. can't just go round checking websites - has to wait for complaints from public. Jay asks why it takes so long - Graham talks about prioritising abuse cases.
Graham: Public authorities and businesses realise IC has teeth - can impose fines up to £500,000 for data breaches since 2010.
Rhodri Davies QC, representing NI, says he is surprised by Graham's second statement, which they haven't seen.
Jay asks Graham about his evidence to the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee in 2009.
Jay asks InfoComm how he knows press has cleaned up act on PIs when they demonstrably didnt do so over hacking
Graham: haven't got any evidence beyond what we published in 2006
Jay insists Graham gets back to the task in hand today.
Graham: We seem to be in a circular debate. #Leveson: I don't know whether a search would produce similar material to Op M + neither do you.
Guardian Live Blog:
Jay asks why the information commissioner does not investigate more recent use of private investigators.Graham says that he is puzzled by the suggestion that the information commissioner should go and investigate something "in the absence of evidence of wrongdoing".
Jay: We're not looking at archaeology. We're looking at the present.
Jay asks Graham about s32 of Data Protection Act, exceptions for journalism, lit and art (irrelevant to criminal acts under s55).
Jay points to s43, allowing IC to serve a notice on search agency to provide info on compliance with data protection principles.
Graham very defensive - says has been too busy to go to check on how Mr Whittamore is getting on. Jay persisting with suggestion that IC has not been proactive enough.
From Guardian Live Blog:
Graham is asked about the principles behind section 32 of the Data Protection Act (DPA).Jay says these principles mean that the Information Commissioner's Office can justifiably seek information from private investigators on whether they are in breach of the DPA.
Graham suggests Jay is talking about hypothetical situations.
"We're not talking hypothetical because Express Newspapers were using J&J Services in 2010 … and other newspapers are using search agencies systematically," Jay replies.
Graham accepts there is power for the Information Commissioner's Office to undertake "spot checks" on private investigation firms.
Graham suggesting there is no political will to see his powers more regulatory basis.
Guardian Live Blog:
Graham refers to the Hacked Off letter.
He says it is not "practicable" for the ICO to notify the thousands of people revealed by the Met police's Operation Motorman to have been targeted by Steve Whittamore in the first half of the last decade.
Part of the answer to that is I would have to take on a veritable army of people. I'm not going to say it isn't necessary but all regulators need to prioritise resources.
Graham: If Hacked Off and their lawyers are representing particular individuals then that's what we're here for.
Graham: since 2009 I've been focusing on information going missing from databases
You're not dealing with a complacent regulator who is not willing to use his powers, InfoComm tells Jay [#Leveson intervenes to lower tempo]
[Graham stands by his point, he is unlikely to serve notices under s43. Says ICO has to focus on current evidence of abuse].
Graham: all regulators have to pick their battles and prioritise resources. I need evidence of there being a problem first
From Guardian Live Blog:
The inquiry is taking a short break while core participants read Graham's second supplementary statement.
Leveson says it deals with evidence from Associated Newspapers lawyer Liz Hartley's testimony on access to the What Price Privacy? report.
Sitting resumes.
From Guardian Live Blog:
Robert Jay QC, counsel for the inquiry, says in 2009 the information commissioner offered news organisations the opportunity to examine the evidence behind the What Price Privacy? reports.
Graham says that Guardian News & Media took up the offer in February 2011 and other news organisations did so on the announcement of the inquiry.
Jay now referring to Hacked Off letter requesting that all 'victims' in Motorman report should be notified and journalists named. Graham says that some of the CMS Committee seemed to be very well informed of what was in the Motorman data notebooks. Says he hasn't the resources to inform every named person. Some are just names, not any reference as to what it was about. Could be more problematic to those named people - another breach of privacy.
InfoComm tells #leveson that he offered to let editors see Motorman files, but only Guardian responded...
...but then #leveson was announced and then suddenly Associated, NI and Express all wanted to look at Motorman files.
InfoComm challenges press:If they aren't doing anything wrong, then they could drop their objections to tougher sanctions.
Lord Justice #Leveson: I'm not entering into a debate the press have with govt, have enough difficulties with press debate against me!
Info Commissioner: The going rate for data protection breach penalties in courts is £100. He would like to see jail sentences #Leveson
Graham: Surely a free press operates within a framework of law. Sometimes you have to apply dark arts and then you're accountable. #Leveson
Info Commissioner: 'You sometimes have to use the dark arts to get a good story.' Then courts would test public interest defence #Leveson
Graham in a heated response to a question from News International lawyer: how many exemptions do you want? #leveson
Guardian Live Blog:
Graham is asked his views on the future of press regulation.He says that for self-regulation to be credible it has to have the confidence of the public and be structured.
He contrasts existing press regulation with regulation in the advertising world, pointing out that the investigative arm of the Advertising Standards Authority is separate from the code-writing arm.
He says it is a "huge mistake" to have serving editors on the panel, but that it should be a "demonstrably independent" model. Serving editors could play a part in writing the code, he says.
Graham says he is not advocating statutory regulation of the press, but says there are tough times ahead for self-regulation.
He says the press should not be allowed to "continue drinking in the last-chance saloon."
"I'm not in favour of statutory regulation of the press … but press regulation will only survive if it's credible," he tells Leveson.
Rhodri Davies, counsel for News International, is questioning Graham.
Graham apologises to Leveson for getting "heated" when asked by Davies whether it is not right that journalists should be exempted from imprisonment under the Data Protection Act.
"How much of a good deal do you guys want?" Graham says. "You fought everyone to a standstill in 2006 … You've got so many privileges and exemptions."
Graham says you the press don't have to use a private investigator to bribe someone at the DVLA to get details. #Leveson
Graham: All you have to advance is public interest of story. If you can't make that case you shouldn't be in journalism. #Leveson
 |
| Camilla Wright |
Popbitch Website
From Guardian Live Blog:
A cursory visit to the Popbitch messageboard shows that users are debating the Leveson inquiry with some fervour.
Wright, a journalist, co-founded Popbitch with Neil Stevenson in 2000. She is director of the newsletter and website.
Wright: PRs act as gatekeepers to celebrities. You have to be careful what you write in a commercial sense.
Guardian Live Blog:
Popbitch has two main elements: a weekly email newsletter and a message board.The weekly newsletter now has 350,000 subscribers. Wright says a decision was taken early on not to feature paparazzi pictures.
Wright: We write about "the stories behind the stories" like Private Eye, and lighthearted details.
Wright says many newspapers shy away from negative stories about celebrities because they wouldn't be fed stories by their agents
Guardian Live Blog:
Wright suggests that Popbitch acts as a foil to the "very PR-driven" entertainment industry. She mentions evidence given to the inquiry last week by the editors of Heat, Hello! and OK! magazines, when they admitted that the majority of stories in those magazines are placed there by PR figures.
She reminds #leveson the celeb world is tightly controlled. Newspapers can be shy of running negative stories on stars for fear of ostracism
Inquiry now examining a Popbitch story headlined "for chuck's sake"
Patry-Hoskins is taking Wright through the most recent Popbitch newsletter. Top story is about Kim Kardashian's ex-husband.
Guardian Live Blog:
Patry asks about a story in the Popbitch newsletter about the ex-husband of Kim Kardashian.Wright says the story was sourced from a friend who was at the event and it was published in an attempt to point out that there is a darker side to celebrity culture.
'Popbitch is trying to entertain but also inform', author Camilla Wright tells Leveson
In trying 'to understand the product,' court is discussing Popbitch story on how Dr No in James Bond was almost played by a monkey
[ #Leveson has not yet informed the inquiry whether he is a subscriber to PopBitch. He doesn't seem very surprised by content so far. ]
Wright: I would double source contentious and controversial stories, and seek out more evidence.
Camilla Wright of Popbitch at #leveson - About 50pc of what's sent in you can work out right away isn't true
Wright: web has evolved so now a two-way conversation between reader and writer. Readers expect to be involved in shaping stories
Wright - Popbitch is entertainment, we're trying to do no more than poke fun
Paying for stories would encourage people to lie or put forward too damaging information to us, Camilla Wright tells
Wright: Our self-regulation has worked for us.
Wright on Popbitch's scoop on Victoria Beckham's pregnancy: I wd be much more careful now about making sure she was past 12 weeks
Guardian Live Blog:
Wright claims that the definition of the public interest is not broad enough and "is not fit for purpose in the world we live in now".She says that the public has much more power to influence others these days, and it is not just down to big media groups and politics.
Camilla Wright of Popbitch at #leveson - "we look at who is making themselves influential and if so are they living up to it"
Popbitch says privacy is a "moving line" ...she is struggling here, I think, given the meat of Popbitch is about celebrity's lives
will Camilla Wright talk about the hilarious popbitch trend for Milly Dowler pics and gags back in the day?
Wright: you can't choose when you're public and choose when you're private
Wright: I haven't read the PCC code cover to cover but I have read relevant sections.
Wright: Popbitch has made five to six apologies in its history.
Guardian Live Blog:
The Popbitch messageboard is not formally regulated, Wright says, but a group of long-term users help keep the comments on topic.
She says the website has made five to six apologies since it was founded, "so one ever two years".
Thoroughly depressing listening to the squirming justifications of the PopBitch creator at #Leveson Inquiry.
Wright: You learn the value of negotiation and mediation with anyone who makes a complaint as speedily as you can.
Patry-Hoskins asks Wright about a libel case won against Popbitch by actor Max Beesley.
Patry-Hoskins asks Wright about claim that papers put stories in Popbitch so they can quote the newsletter as a source.
Wright: Papers sometimes leak stories to us, I try not to use them. Now v easy to get information online using social media.
Wright: The stories we would normally look at are not the kiss and tell type of stories which is where injunctions come in.
Wright: A lot of people on the internet might not sign up to regulation, and publish externally into the UK.
Guardian Live Blog:
Leveson says he is not sure there is "so much of a difference" between what Popbitch does and what newspapers do. He suggests the site has grown far from its roots as a small-circulation newsletter.The judge asks whether it would useful to have an external ombudsman – or an arbitral system – who Popbitch could ask for advice about stories.
Wright says it is "very interesting" and could be useful. However, she says that being an internet product it would be easy to be published in the US to get around a UK regulator.
RT @benfenton Wright asks if #leveson is suggesting there is regulation of people with big followings on Twitter. Judge doesn't rule it out.
