Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Missing Milly Dowler's voicemail "hacked by News of the World"

What's amusing is the number of editors and journalists who have done similar things and will be worried about the 5 a.m knock on the door (when they're probably not even being investigated)
 
this sounds ominous

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/aug/29/leveson-letter-press-chris-blackhurst?INTCMP=SRCH

The editor ofthe Independenthas said he fears that Lord Justice Leveson is "loading a gun" against the industry as he prepares his final report and recommendations following his inquiry into press culture and ethics.

Chris Blackhurst said a letter issued by Leveson to all major national and regional newspapers warning them of potential criticism he may make in his report amounts to a "demolition of the industry".

Blackhurst told BBC Radio 4's The Media Show on Wednesday afternoon that there was nothing positive in the letter, which runs to more than 100 pages.

"It is a damning indictment of my industry," he said. He added that "some of the criticisms are certainly justified", but that others "raise eyebrows" and do not bear any relation to practices at his paper or other titles at his "end of the market".

Blackhurst said his reaction was one of "shock and anger that it is so one-sided. It's a diatribe".
 
It's not Leveson's job to reassure the newspapers and pat them on the back, noting the positive aspects of their work. What did Blackhurst expect?
 
It's a pre-publication thing outlining what the 'charges' are and inviting them to respond that blackhurst has misread as a considered verdict - and he misread, i suspect, because he's shitting it.
 
It'd be ace if it was a diatribe; bet it won't be though.

Having read a few such reports, I make you right. The media may well take it as a diatribe, but following the usual format, it'll be a series of points, criticisms and recommendations, each of which will be closely explained.
It wouldn't surprise me if the E.S. reads like a diatribe, though. It's impossible to do detailed explanation in a summary.
 
Tactical misreading is a good way of putting it - i was looking for something like instrumental misreading rather than genuine misreading and that nails it i think.
 
I just hope he doesn't come down too heavily on press freedom. But it sounds like he will.

But what does "come down heavily on press freedom" mean in the context of Leveson?

I'm expecting him to propose a New Press Complaints machinery that is operated by the industry, but with some statutory backup. This is a good thing (and I'm writing this from an editorial desk at a news magazine).

Some newspaper owners have presented any restriction on their right to do what they damn well please as an attack on press freedom. This is a bad thing.
 
I've lost track of arrests. Another one, for alleged bribery, today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19610695

A journalist has been arrested by police investigating alleged corrupt payments to public officials.

The 43-year-old was held at a southwest London police station at about 09:00 BST after he went there by appointment.

Scotland Yard said the man was arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to corrupt and suspicion of conspiracy to cause misconduct in a public office.

Don't know what paper he worked for, yet.
 
Sky is a fit and proper broadcaster, rules Ofcom

The media regulator Ofcom has found that BSkyB remains a "fit and proper" owner of a broadcast licence despite the phone-hacking affair which embroiled its parent company and during which, it said, James Murdoch's conduct repeatedly fell short of the standard to be expected.

The review, carried out in the wake of the scandal and News International's closure of the News of the World, was aimed at establishing whether the satellite television group – whose largest shareholder is News Corporation – remained eligible to broadcast in the UK.

If it had decided that either Murdoch – the younger son of Rupert Murdoch who stood down as chairman of News International in March and as chairman of BSkyB in April, but remains on the board as a non-executive director – or the company itself were not fit and proper owners, the regulator could have revoked BSkyB's licence.
 
That was never happening anyway, realistically. The TV services show little of the bias and pervasive nastiness that ran/runs through its print media.
 
Shame, I was hoping they would force Murdoch to sell his share, like the old Independent Television Authority did when Murdoch took a controlling share in London Weekend TV, back in the 70's.

But, the gut feeling was they wouldn't, OFCOM just doesn't have the balls that the ITA (and later the IBA) had. :(

Between 1969 and 1970, Australian media owner Rupert Murdoch purchased a controlling interest in LWT, following an altercation on a live LWT show presented by David Frost (coincidentally the first live colour programme shown on ITV). Immediately, he set about dismissing existing board members, and changing schedules and programme ideas. Although it made him unpopular within sections of LWT, audience share began to grow and, albeit slowly, so did income and profits.

However, Murdoch's presence rang alarm bells at the ITA, who expressed concern that a foreign national and owner of significant British newspaper interests, could own a British television station. A discreet but effective ultimatum was given: Murdoch had to sell up, or LWT would have its licence revoked. The ITA won, and in 1971, Murdoch left.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Weekend_Television
 
Back
Top Bottom