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

[smokedout]

The devil is in the detail really. Press freedom is good in so many ways but we mustn't forget that the press we have is soiled by the nature of who owns it and works in it.

And yes it came up repeatedly at Leveson that some of this stuff is slightly absurd to come to a head now because of the changes underway via the internet. And when it comes to this stuff I'm concerned that regardless of lower barriers to entry, the old media entities still have the upper hand in many ways on the net, they have the size, the staff, the ability to work with the advertising model, promotion model, etc. And this in turn raises issues such as how publications that do a fairer job of serving the great unwashed can function online, which includes problems trying to engage the audience in a sustainable and compelling way. I'm underwhelmed with what has been achieved so far, there is still potential, but just like with politics we are a bit stuffed by where peoples heads are at in the modern world.

all of this is true. none of it will be changed in the slightest by any kind of statutory regulation - quite the opposite, old media will demand it applies to new media as well and use this to further entrench their dominance - regulation, which would mean some form of licencing however that is presented, could cut off any possible challenge to big media

 

[03gills]

Gove was mocking Leveson at the Spectator awards.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/nov/21/michael-gove-mocks-leveson-spectator-awards

Yeah, there's been a fair bit of this going on in the last few weeks. Those with vested interests suddenly coming out against leveson, hilariously trying to paint themselves as protectors of freedom and democracy. You know, like David Blunkett, that well known bastion of liberty and democracy who wanted to bring in ID cards.

 

[DexterTCN]

No credible evidence of bias from Jeremy Twunt over BSkyB? Fuck off.

 

[teqniq]

No credible evidence of bias from Jeremy Twunt over BSkyB? Fuck off.

What???

 

[DexterTCN]

No extensive evidence of police corruption, police made 'poor decisions'

 

[DexterTCN]

No extensive evidence of police corruption, police made 'poor decisions'

- being reported as 'no evidence' by sky.

 

[butchersapron]

May i remind people - today of all days - that privacy is for paedos.

 

[butchersapron]

Who'd of thought an oxbridge boy, a member of the elite, would produce a report favourable to the political and media oxbridge educated elite. Despite elements of that elite getting flustered.

 

[elbows]

And he didnt say anything too nasty about the police either, what a shocker.

 

[elbows]

This government believes in wights and wesponsibilities, but that these should not be enforced by laws and statutory wegulations. However in wegard to the wascal mwultitude having access to alcoholic liquids for which they have not been aquewately educated, at a pwice that may encowage thwem to be weckless and uwinate through the letterboxes of wight honowable mwemebers, we must act!

 

[Plumdaff]

And even this remarkably tame proposal is too much for Cameron. He's almost giving the impression of bias.

I can't get over how establishment bollocky that phrase is.

 

[Treacle Toes]

He agrees with all recommendations but is not going to implement any...becuase x, y, z.....

 

[Jon-of-arc]

So whats happening? Is anything changing?

 

[weltweit]

So why does Cameron not want legislative underpinning?

 

[barney_pig]

Claggy squeeking his impotent "independence" within the coalition. Give it up cunt, no ones listening

 

[butchersapron]

So why does Cameron not want legislative underpinning?

To what?

 

[weltweit]

To what?

To a new and more independent PCC ...

 

[brogdale]

Claggy squeeking his impotent "independence" within the coalition. Give it up cunt, no ones listening

Exactly how i felt as i turned off the Radio....but, if he actually whipped his bunch through the division with Labour to compel Murdoch's Prime Minister to enact leveson, I'd listen.

 

[weltweit]

To a new and more independent PCC ...

The new body should be backed by legislation designed to assess whether it is doing its job properly.

The legislation would enshrine, for the first time, a legal duty on the government to protect the freedom of the press.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20543133

 

[butchersapron]

Exactly how i felt as i turned off the Radio....but, if he actually whipped his bunch through the division with Labour to compel Murdoch's Prime Minister to enact leveson, I'd listen.

This isn't a bill.

Give us what levson is as you are here. This thing that you might turn lib dem for.

 

[brogdale]

This isn't a bill.

Give us what levson is as you are here. This thing that you might turn lib dem for.

Don't know about Bills, but as i understand it there could be a vote on Leveson, and a number of MPs quizzed Clegg about whether he would support a 'free vote' on the issue.

Not that any of that would make me 'turn Lib Dem'.

 

[butchersapron]

Don't know about Bills, but as i understand it there could be a vote on Leveson, and a number of MPs quizzed Clegg about whether he would support a 'free vote' on the issue.

Not that any of that would make me 'turn Lib Dem'.

Good to hear, the potentially listening is still worrying.

 

[smokedout]

round up of levesons recommendation on the guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/29/leveson-inquiry-report-qanda

He says it should be all news and periodical publishers, including news publishers online. He wants all the major players ie the national press and as many local papers and magazines as possible. He hopes that the carrots and sticks will attract online publishers.
Ultimately, however, in addressing a scenario in which some publishers may stay out of the system and trigger backstop regulation from Ofcom, Leveson explores who this applies to. He says it would apply to organisations of a sufficient size and impact, among those that provide "news-like services" with Ofcom helping to define this.
It raises the prospect of a large digital player – such as Google News or Yahoo News – being required to join a regulator or be regulated by Ofcom. This is the sting in the Leveson plan – is it in effect a form of licensing?

what will be sufficient size and impact - guido fawkes, sally bercows tweets, where will the threshold be - how the fuck is size and impact measured outside of print, lots of websites, probably including this one have bigger reach than some local freesheet

what penalties emerge if publishers tell ofcom to fuck off, how much government interference would a body have, where are the safeguards

its a load of fucking bollocks if you ask me and i hope it isnt implemented

 

[ViolentPanda]

This government believes in wights and wesponsibilities, but that these should not be enforced by laws and statutory wegulations. However in wegard to the wascal mwultitude having access to alcoholic liquids for which they have not been aquewately educated, at a pwice that may encowage thwem to be weckless and uwinate through the letterboxes of wight honowable mwemebers, we must act!

Shit, you saw me doing that, did you?

 

[ViolentPanda]

So why does Cameron not want legislative underpinning?

What, besides queering the pitch for cosy collaboration between neoliberal government and the media?

 

[ViolentPanda]

round up of levesons recommendation on the guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/29/leveson-inquiry-report-qanda




what will be sufficient size and impact - guido fawkes, sally bercows tweets, where will the threshold be - how the fuck is size and impact measured outside of print, lots of websites, probably including this one have bigger reach than some local freesheet

what penalties emerge if publishers tell ofcom to fuck off, how much government interference would a body have, where are the safeguards

its a load of fucking bollocks if you ask me and i hope it isnt implemented

Careful, lad. The regulator doesn't like swearing.

 

[elbows]

So why does Cameron not want legislative underpinning?

 

[agricola]

Exactly how i felt as i turned off the Radio....but, if he actually whipped his bunch through the division with Labour to compel Murdoch's Prime Minister to enact leveson, I'd listen.

Murdoch's Prime Minister isnt Prime Minister any more, he left that post in 2007.

As for this - I think that Cameron has been wrongfooted a bit by how weak the report is in terms of calling for regulation of the press, so he has been forced to pretend that there arent any restrictions on the press at the moment (something that Mulcaire and Goodman know isnt true, and something that Brooks et al will hopefully find out isnt true) and that bringing in even something as guaranteed to fail as the Leveson system of regulation would be intolerable.

What he would have been better doing is pointing to the offences already on the statute book, and make sure that someone (ideally either OFCOM or the Information Commissioner) is funded to create an effective unit that can both take, investigate and prosecute allegations of press malpractice and which can resist pressure from the Press more effectively than the Met did.

 

[Streathamite]

This isn't a bill.

Please help me out, I'm baffled here. There is certainly no Bill as yet (hardly surprising as the report is hours old), but I formed the impression m'lud recommended some statutory element of a new complaints commission, with independent members sitting on it, plus Ofcom being given formal powers as a regulator of second resort, and as a monitor of the new commission. In short, won't all that need some legislation, a Bill?

 

[smokedout]

Careful, lad. The regulator doesn't like swearing.

fuck