"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 |
From Guardian:
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 behaviour
Module 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 politicians
Module 4: Recommendations for a more effective policy and regulation that supports the integrity and freedom of the press while encouraging the highest ethical standards.
Leveson Inquiry Witness Statements HERE
Witness list for this week (6th - 9th February) to be found HERE
Video Recordings of each day's proceedings HERE
Live Feed From Leveson Inquiry Site HERE
BBC Democracy Live Feed HERE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today's links to articles, info and comments relevant to the Leveson Inquiry (frequently updated) :
Alastair Campbell, the former No 10 communications director, has just released this statement on his phone-hacking settlement at the high court this morning:
This is a satisfactory outcome, for which I thank solicitor Gerald Shamash and QC Jeremy Reed, and I am particularly pleased that News Group have also undertaken to continue searches of other "documents in its possession", so that I can ascertain the extent of any further wrongdoing, both for the time I worked in Downing Street and since, and they have agreed I "may be entitled to further damages in certain circumstances".
This is not, and never has been, about the money, with which I shall be making donations to various organisations including the Labour party, Leukaemia and Lymphoma Research, Mind, Rethink Mental Illness, Comprehensive Future, Local Schools Network and Clarets Trust, so that at least some small good for the causes I believe in can come out of the criminality and cultural depravity of others.
For me, this has been about people with a voice and a platform using them to change the media culture which, as I argued at the Leveson inquiry, has become putrid in parts. We have seen plenty of that exposed at the inquiry. It took John Prescott and others to expose police wrongdoing in their handling of phone-hacking. It has taken lots of other public figures to expose the full extent – so far – of wrongdoing by the News of the World. And it took the revelations about Milly Dowler to create the tipping point that forced the government finally to set up an inquiry into press standards, something which, as I have said before, Labour should have done.
Where this all leads is anyone's guess. But the debate has to be kept alive and at the front of the public mind once Leveson concludes. There are already signs that the Tory ministers in particular are not keen on going along with major reform of the regulatory system if that is what the Inquiry recommends. They prefer the remarkable level of media support they currently enjoy to acting in the national interst to improve the level of debate, and the standards of the media.
It is incumbent upon all who for whatever reason are in this debate about press standards, and the relationship between press, politics and public, to keep fighting for the full truth about the nature of the modern media to be exposed, and for something better to be put in its place in terms of ownership, standards and regulation.
9 more cases settling. Coogan 40k. Hughes 45k Sky Andrew 75k. 5 new cases filed. C Church fights on
- From Guardian Live Blog: 2:48 p.m.
Ben Fenton, the Financial Times media correspondent, pretty well sums up the ongoing exchange between Starmer, Robert Jay QC, and Lord Jusice Leveson:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday 8th February 2012
( Link to Hearing 37 HERE )
Today's Witnesses:
Helen Belcher ( Transmedia Watch )
Carla Buzasi ( Huffington Post )
Martin Moore ( Media Standards Trust )
Will Moy ( Full Fact )
Paul Staines ( Guido Fawkes Blog)
Keir Starmer ( Director of Public Prosecutions )
Pam Surphlis ( SAMM NI )
Carla Buzasi
Barr describes the Huffington Post as a "Sunday newspaper every day" - not a bad strap line
Buzasi: one of the things that make HuffPo unique is that we open that blogging platform out to a wide range of people
Guardian Live Blog:
Buzasi says that Huffington Post UK is covered by the British jurisdiction and that it is a member of the PCC.
Huffington Post UK editorial guidelines are framed around the PCC code, Buzasi tells the inquiry.
Huffington Post UK has terms and conditions for its bloggers – but no editorial control, Buzasi says.The website does permit anonymous blogposts, but will "strongly encourage" them to use real identities.
The majority of the website's user comments are not pre-moderated, she says, but a filter tool will flag up potentially offensive content.
Martin Moore
 |
| Will Moy - Full Fact, Martin Moore - Media Standards Trust |
Will Moy - Full Fact Submission to Leveson Inquiry
Moy : D Express headline splash "House prices set to surge", opposite was true
Full Fact Story on the Above D Express Article
In Mr Moore's written submission he says "at its heart the phone hacking scandal was about abuse of power"
Moore : in last decade trust in journos - tab/broadsheet/broadcast - has declined
Moore: polls more recently... there has been a decline (in people's trust) more broadly , of broadsheet and mid-market and tabloid
Full Fact's Assessment of the Latest 'Trust in Journalism' Polls
Moore: absolutely think it's incredibly important to talk about the enormous amount of excellent good journalism across the country
From Guardian Live Blog:
Moy has provided examples of what he describes as "wilful inaccuracy" in stories by newspapers.Jay puts forward one front-page story from the Daily Express claiming that house prices were "set to surge". However, the experts whose figures were used actually said they were to drop.
Moy says Full Fact's job is "to play the ball not the man" and raise awareness of the issues, not make judgments about journalists.
Moore says that the inquiry has heard clear examples of "gross intrusion across many aspects of different people's lives".
There has been a decline in trust in newspapers across the board in the past decade, Moore claims.
Moore: excellent journalism particularly at local level. Local news is struggling, but journalists work very hard
Moy: fewer than 2 in 10 people trust journalists to tell the truth
Moy: we have spent a lot of time focusing on impact on victims and but barely touched on widespread problem of accuracy
Moy : widespread inaccuracy in press is a regulatory failing
Moy: Good journalism devalued by journalism that is recklessly inaccurate
Moy: it's for the industry to uphold its own standards and it's for the regulator to do the rest
Very powerful testimony by Will Moy of Full Fact. Not all journalism untrustworthy, but enough so doesn't make sense to trust it.
Moore: we have three projects very focused on online media, specifically to give people more tools to make more informed judgments
Moy adds trust in journalism is v important for society.Describes"reckless inaccuracy"which can be addressed by regulation, not law.
Moore: makes sense public should be given opportunity to know if something is inaccurate and intrusive or misrepresentative
From Telegraph Live Blog:
Media Standards Trust runs the website Journalisted which lists journalists and their work. It helps the public track, contact and challenge journalists and their work.
Moore says the sourcing of work is "very poor", and journalists decline to link to original sources online.
MST also runs
Churnalism - a site that allows the public to see how much of a news story is comprised of press release material.
Moore says a regulator should focus on "process, not content".
Moy: we've only ever had one case where our view was that there was an inaccuracy that was not accepted (by newspaper)
Jay citing Moy evidence - some papers accepted error in 1 case reasonably speedily others dragged feet, others denied it altogether
On corrections, FT have been pretty constructive responding to us.FT is an exception among daily newspapers.
Guardian often good, but also an example of why readers' editors not a panacea. Can be long delays or complaints "drop off radar"
Moore:... and could neither judge the PCC nor judge the newspapers who had either breached or not breached the code
Moore: in 2010 of the over 6,000 original complaints, many of which we know fall off, only ones available to analyse are 526
Moore: in all my experience, the PCC secretariat have been extremely helpful, worked amazingly hard
Moore: without having the data, without knowing, it's impossible to do that (analyse effectiveness of PCC)
Moy accepts "call a statistician!" isn't a commonly issued cry -
Moore: it would be very helpful to break down who takes a very long time and try to work out why that is
Moy: a timeframe on dealing with complaints is something we regard as vital having been led down the merry path many times
Moore: at time when MST (published report on PCC) it was absolutely not accepted. not accepted by PCC who attacked the report
Editors' Code of Practice Review - Full Fact Submission
Moore: many editor have told inquiry they're very proud to have only had limited number of upheld adjudications against them
The PCC complaints made by Mr Stephen Nutt, currently being discussed by at
Guardian Live Blog:
Moore suggests that the PCC airbrushes the picture on complaints because the number of upheld adjudications is very low – but he claims the number of resolved breaches are very high.
In one case, the Daily Mail was unilaterally planning to run a correction in its newspaper two days before the PCC was due to release a formal adjudication, Moy tells the inquiry.He says he found this out from a member of the PCC complaints team. This was planned shortly after the Daily Mail introduced its new page 2 complaints and clarifications column.
"This absolutely sums up the weakness of the PCC in that sort of situation," he says. "There is a sense that newspapers can play games with the PCC and the PCC can't do much about it."
Guardian Live Blog:
In one case, the Daily Mail was unilaterally planning to run a correction in its newspaper two days before the PCC was due to release a formal adjudication, Moy tells the inquiry.
He says he found this out from a member of the PCC complaints team. This was planned shortly after the Daily Mail introduced its new page 2 complaints and clarifications column.
"This absolutely sums up the weakness of the PCC in that sort of situation," he says. "There is a sense that newspapers can play games with the PCC and the PCC can't do much about it."
Moore: the MST has formed a review group to look at new form of regulatory system. Planning to submit report to inquiry in May
Moore: if you tell people if they don't come into the system then they can't publish that's detrimental to freedom of speech
Guardian Live Blog:
Moore says the Media Standards Trust has formed a review group on regulation, and plans to submit its report to Leveson in May. However, its initial view is that it would prefer a voluntary system in the first instance, possibly with statutory or non-statutory incentives to comply. He adds that there are three "levers" that could get people to comply: legal, fiscal (foe example VAT incentives), and access to information (as suggested by Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre earlier this week)
Moore: If regulation is to be voluntary, it has to be incentivised enough, so that the people you want to be inside are inside
Moy: been a bit dismal watching a sort of binary debate between statutory and non-statutory and that seems fairly useless
Moy: we want to coin a phrase "we agree with Lord Leveson" (on unnecessary binary debate)
Guardian Live Blog:
Moy says there is a tendency for the debate about regulation to descend into a "binary" battle between supporters of statutory and non-statutory approaches. He adds that it is simplistic to say anything involving statute is terrible. A more fulsome debate would be about how exactly to achieve the aims of the inquiry, he says.
Moy says it is "wrong" that the PCC code of practice is a strong document. From the point of view of the complainant it is "actually very tricky" and "obscure", he claims.
Journalists and editors have lined up at the inquiry to praise the basic tenets of the PCC's code of practice.
Moy complains that there is no standard of proof in the code, describing it as an "extraordinary lapse".
Moy: Ambition lacking is for journalists to provide the best avail version of the truth. Too often letter, not spirit, of law.
Moy: A complaints-handling body pursues the complaint; a regulator pursues the problem
Moy: Current regulation assumes good faith on the part of newspapers which is not always there.
Moore: it's just extremely important to continue to emphasise there's an opportunity to defend journalism in the public interest
Here is an example of bad information directly influencing a live policy debate:
Moy: Real harm is done by inaccuracy - it undermines policy, spreads cynicism & causes real hurt to groups of people.
Paul Staines
Parliament Questions Bloggers on Privacy and Injunctions - Video - 14th November 2011
Witness Statement #1 in Full
Witness Statement #2 in Full
From Guardian Live Blog:
David Barr, counsel to the inquiry, reads out Staines's "diverse career history," including a stint as a bond dealer, a professional gambler and an organiser of "mass attendance dance events, or raves".
Staines: current readership daily, 50 to 100,000
Staines: I think the BBc Mark Thompson explained that we beat them
Staines is asked about the Ryan Giggs privacy injunction.
He says that he suggested on Twitter a five-a-side, including Ryan Giggs, and two managers to oversee the team "but nothing came of it".
Barr asks about WikiLeaks and a Guido Fawkes post in 2008.The post was a show of support to WikiLeaks in relation to a leaked memo about the bank Northern Rock.
The Financial Times also received the memo but was "hit with injunctions," says Staines. The blogger then uploaded the memo to WikiLeaks and other websites in different jurisdictions around the world.
Staines says he was attempting to thwart the court order because it involved £50m of public money.
"What I think you're missing is that I'm a citizen of a free republic and, since 1922, I don't have to pay attention to what a British judge orders me to do."
. described how he went against a court judgement to publish details about where taxpayers' £ went
On anonymous tips, Guido says, we will make efforts to verify them, if we can.
Guardian Live Blog:
Barr raises an injunction brought by the former RBS chief executive Fred Goodwin.
The Guido Fawkes blog "set out a riddle" to identify Goodwin after the banker obtained an injunction that banned his name being linked to allegations of an extra-marital affair, Barr says.
Staines; Obviously people always have an agenda when they come to us with information
A lot of what politicians tell you is untrue, particularly the denials.
Staines: Stories come in via email without a name, or with a pseudonym - have a voicemail that people can use for tip offs
Staines: ethical goal is to report the truth as we see it (says in his witness statement)
We strive for accuracy rather than guarantee it. We have to work fast, but can change things fast too.
Staines: I think celebrities like... Hugh Grant did put himself out in public and should expect to be scrutinised
Guardian Live Blog:
Staines is asked about privacy."I don't think people in public life, people paid for by the taxpayer, should expect the same degree of privacy as a private citizen can expect," he says.
People in public life will lie to those around them because they have more to lose, he suggests.
He says there is almost always a public interest angle when it comes to politicians, and criticises celebrities such as Hugh Grant who he says claim they are not public figures.
Staines says the Daily Telegraph was right to use subterfuge on its Vince Cable "sting", and the PCC was wrong to rule against it.
He claims that the story exposed Cable as saying something different in private than in public, adding that it is important to expose hypocrisy in public officials.
Asked about phone and email hacking, he says both those are against the law and "we don't need to reform the regulation system" to deal with them.
Guido (Paul Staines) Fawkes says he ignores most complaints, but not when the person written about is the complainant.
If people make a big fuss about something trivial, we probably take it down to make them go away.
Guido says kitemarking is "not a road I want to go down".
I would have to self-censor and be politically correct. I don't want to adhere to standards Harriet Harman would approve of.
Guardian Live Blog:
Staines says he does not want to be part of the new system of self-regulation."Lord Hunt was very silky in his wooing of me to join some kind of kitemark system and I don't think that's a road I want to go down," he adds.
"I would end up in a system where I would have to self censor. I don't want to have a product that is politically correct. I don't think there are many publishers around now – not even Private Eye – that are politically incorrect in the way that we are."
Staines: Lord Hunt is very silky in his wooing of me to join some kind of kite mark system. Not a road I want to go down.
Staines: Journalists have told me Tina Weaver had authorised them to hack and blag. She sits on the PCC and ed standards committee.
[Will be seeking Trinity Mirror comment on accusation by Guido that editor of Sunday Mirror ordered phone hacking]
Guardian Live Blog:
Staines tells the inquiry that two journalists have told him that Tina Weaver, editor of the Sunday Mirror, has ordered journalists "to hack, blag, all those things".
"And she sits on the editors' code committee … she knows what's been going on," he adds.
Guido saying "if we premoderate comments we become legally liable for them"
Staines: we already have crimes on the statute that cover phone hacking, we don't need additional regulation
Staines: It's a standard technique for press officers to give tit bits to their favourite journalists. They bring journos to heel.
Staines: as a punishment for an aggressive interview, a journalist will be denied access to a politician for six months
Staines: The only reason the expenses scandal came out was Heather Brooke spent two years pursuing it through the courts.
Staines reveals he sold Hague gay bar photos to NOTW for 20 grand but they never published them. Wow
So the implication is that Coulson and Cameron conspired to prevent publication of Hague adviser gay bar photos
Telegraph's being fingered by for allegedly using nefarious methods to track down the latter's address
Staines: We're a nation of law so that's going to have to be ultimate route that people go down [for redress over press invasion].
Staines: Stopping these abuses (re: Chris Jeffries/McCanns) from happening means you’ll lose the freedom of the press
If this inquiry doesn't act as a catalyst for prosecution of [Motorman] journalists, you will have failed, Guido tells
Staines: Huge body of evidence from Motorman, 389 journalists on the records yet nothing is happening, should be prosecuted.
Staines: There is manifest prime facia evidence of crimes, it shouldn't be ignored.
asked how he got Campbell witness statement draft, source was journo thinks he got it from another journo
Staines: Was told Weaver had asked journos to "spin" a phone. Hacking info on Piers Morgan is derived from his own writing.
Helen Belcher
Transmedia Watch Website Transsexual people and the Press - By Christine Burns
Just Plain Sense - Trans People and the Media
Submission by TransMedia Watch
Just been joined by , says PCC regarded as "a joke" by the trans community
Belcher: trans people don't complain about articles, because the PCC has received a number of complaints and nothing ever changes
Belcher: Press routinely misgenders people, using before and after pictures, former name and demeaning language.
 |
| Example of very recent tabloid article. |
From Guardian Live Blog:
Jay raises articles that were put to Sun editor Dominic Mohan yesterday, including the headline "Tran or woman".She says the Sun's use of the term "tran" objectifies transgender people.
According to Belcher, the Sun made a reference in the article to the TV programme There's Something About Miriam. But doing that "the Sun is basically saying, 'trans people illicit horror. Trans people are basically frauds'," she says.
Tranny Granny Raids Three banks - The Sun - Scotland (mentioned by Helen Belcher)
Belcher: Individuals rarely want to pursue cases because they become afraid of future harassment.
Counsel querying if there's a note of evidence that Peta Buscombe told couldn't chg code because of editors
Belcher: Only grounds for PCC complaint without a named individual are accuracy. This rarely addresses underlying meaning.
Belcher: I would love to hear Sun's public interest justification for disclosing the gender transition of a lorry driver.
Belcher: There's a confusion between what the public might be interested in and public interest
Helen Belcher says the byline "Daily Mail Reporter" is code for agency copy; when challenged Mail denies responsibility
Belcher: economic inequality prevents trans people from challenging "well funded media companies" in the courts
Belcher: Trans people can have less access to justice as often paid less than if they were not trans. Hard to take legal action.
Belcher: There’s a stigma (surrounding trans people) that is a further deterrent for them to seek recompense
Belcher: We're not asking for special treatment [by the press] we're asking for the same treatment.
Keir Starmer
Starmer - there's no explicit policy or guidance relating to prosecution of journalists
Starmer is being asked how the CPS deals with cases (such as used in blagging) where a public interest defence is mounted.
From Guardian Live Blog:
Starmer says there are three types of statutory defences for journalists. The first is that there was an "express public interest" in the act; the second is statutes where there is an implied defence of public interest in terms of the right to free speech; the third concerns the Official Secrets Act.
Jay asks if section 55 of the Data Protection Act falls under the category one defence. Starmer confirms that it does.
The Computer Misuse Act and common law offences, such as misconduct in public office, fall under the second category.
Says there are both "express" and "implied" public interest defences. Distinction is about what stage CPS looks at the defence.
Guardian Live Blog:
Starmer says there are three types of statutory defences for journalists. The first is that there was an "express public interest" in the act; the second is statutes where there is an implied defence of public interest in terms of the right to free speech; the third concerns the Official Secrets Act.
Jay asks if section 55 of the Data Protection Act falls under the category one defence. Starmer confirms that it does.
The Computer Misuse Act and common law offences, such as misconduct in public office, fall under the second category.
Starmer says that if there is a statutory defence the CPS has to be sure it can defeat it. If it is not written down in law then it is more discretionary, he tells the inquiry.
Starmer asks about the CPS's approach to the possible prosecution of journalists.He says: "It seems to me it would be prudent to have a policy that sets out in one place the factors that prosecutors will take into account when considering whether to prosecute journalists acting in the course of their newsgathering."
He proposes an interim policy to reflect on the existing principles but put it in one place.
Starmer says he is "pretty sure" he has jurisdiction over offences under section 55 of the Data Protection Act.
Interim policy will be ready in a matter of weeks. NEWS.
Pam Surphlis
Guardian Live blog:
Surphlis says she set up SAMM NI primarily as a support group, but after she read "salacious gossip" about the death of her father and sister she contacted other families in the same situation.
This resulted in a report investigating two areas: the relationship between journalists and the victims' families; and the effects of the coverage on the victims' families.
Surphlis: We've had journalists pretending to be friends of other members of the family just to get in-depth interviews.
Surphlis: Press seem to be judgemental about personal details of victims that have nothing to do with their killing.
Surphlis: A lot of families give in to giving interviews in the hope it will stop press intrusion.
Surphlis: Families don't want to know how to handle the media, because they don't want the media in the first place.
Guardian Live Blog:
The participants in the study found the media were "intrusive and insensitive in their approach", Jay says.
Surphlis says journalists pretended to be family members to get interviews and went to family members' places of work to try to get detail for stories.
Surphlis says the PCC's code relating to dealing with deaths is not "user-friendly".
Surphlis says families also faced harassment from photographers.
Surphlis explains how to improve press codes incl. refraining from doorstepping + attending funerals and not misleading family.
Surphlis: Family should have opportunity to review accuracy of interviews before publication w/out compromising ed independence.
Surphlis: Papers should warn if planning to run stories and pics relating to death of loved one weeks, months and years later.
Surphlis: I'm grateful to the inquiry, at least we have a voice somewhere that somebody is prepared to listen to bereaved families.
