Official Secrets Act 1989:
No reports allowed for secret government information. There have been no further reforms to this Act since 1989, possibly because of the increased prominence of the internet, and a wider spread of information. This could have lead towards the Freedom of Information Act (2000). An example: Richard Tomlinson - Former MI6 officer Richard Tomlinson was sentenced to a year in prison in 1997 for passing secrets to an Australian publisher. He was released after six months and went to his native New Zealand. In 1998, he was arrested in Paris with David Shayler, but was released because of insufficient evidence. An injunction was placed on Tomlinson preventing him from further breaching the Act.
Freedom of Information Act 2000:
The public are entitled to access information surrounding statistics and salaries. This came about in order to gain more of a transparency - particularly from the government's point of view. From John Major's government in the early 90's, politicians had been losing a lot of face, and been portrayed as sneaky (and very sleazy as well). Labour planned to clean up this opinion with the freedom of information, in a bid to be honest and open with the public - things that are of public interest are available for them to obtain. This of course has backfired with the expenses scandal of 2007 exposing things that were very much in the public interest.
Enforcement -A person who has made a request for information may apply to the Information Commissioner for a decision on whether the request has been dealt with according to the Act. In response, the Information Commissioner may serve a decision notice on the public authority and applicant, setting out any steps that are required for compliance with the Act. The Commissioner also has the power to serve information notices and enforcement notices on public authorities. In certain circumstances, the Information Commissioner may issue a decision or enforcement notice requiring disclosure of information in the public interest. If it feels that the Commissioner has erred, the public authority then has 20 days from receipt of the notice to obtain a signed certificate from a Cabinet Minister overriding the Information Commissioner's notice (Executive override). There is no right of appeal against the Ministerial certificate. All notices may be appealed to the independent Information Tribunal.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Statutory Law
In relation to media, the laws that everyone should adhere to - written laws produced in the legislature. These in particular should be looked into through media processes - as a form of transparency to encourage a legitimacy to the press.
These laws will follow the legislation process of parliament, to become an Act of Parliament - law.
An important piece of legislation that can be important within the press is The Official Secrets Act, which condemns spying.
These laws will follow the legislation process of parliament, to become an Act of Parliament - law.
An important piece of legislation that can be important within the press is The Official Secrets Act, which condemns spying.
Leveson Inquiry Incite
Who guards the guardians?
From the phone hacking scandal, the Leveson Inquiry has been set up in order to look into regulations of the press and media. Currently the PCC (the Press Complaints Committee) is in charge of the rules and code of conduct for the editors and producers in the media. As a direct result of the scandal (which has been destroying the credibility of the investigative journalism side to the press), many questions have been raised over reform for the PCC and also regulations to clean up the press (in particular the newspaper industry) are being looked into.
Ian Hislop, editor for Private Eye and also team captain on Have I Got News For You, was summoned to the Inquiry and suggested that the regulations are already in place, but they just need to be enforced.
From the phone hacking scandal, the Leveson Inquiry has been set up in order to look into regulations of the press and media. Currently the PCC (the Press Complaints Committee) is in charge of the rules and code of conduct for the editors and producers in the media. As a direct result of the scandal (which has been destroying the credibility of the investigative journalism side to the press), many questions have been raised over reform for the PCC and also regulations to clean up the press (in particular the newspaper industry) are being looked into.
Ian Hislop, editor for Private Eye and also team captain on Have I Got News For You, was summoned to the Inquiry and suggested that the regulations are already in place, but they just need to be enforced.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Panorama Tabloid Hacks Exposed
1 rogue reporter - fired and went to prison
Subject to pressure to get a story
"public interest"
secret cameras/recorders - legal
method - access without authority is wrong and illegal
southern investigations - private surveillance company - selling information to press
computer hacking just as bad and unlawful - trojan emails
works anywhere in the world
"private investigators" access any
Jonathan Rees - hired investigators to get the information for NOW - got caught and imprisoned but then hired once again when he was released
Subject to pressure to get a story
"public interest"
secret cameras/recorders - legal
method - access without authority is wrong and illegal
southern investigations - private surveillance company - selling information to press
computer hacking just as bad and unlawful - trojan emails
works anywhere in the world
"private investigators" access any
Jonathan Rees - hired investigators to get the information for NOW - got caught and imprisoned but then hired once again when he was released
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Further PCC Information
PCC stands for the Press Complaints Commission. It is the institution that tries to ensure that the press is kept on its toes by allowing people to complain to them and they will look into the issues raised. The Codes of Practice: accuracy, the opportunity for reply, respect for privacy, harassment, intrusion into shock or grief, the interests of children, the protection of children in sex cases, entry into hospitals, the reporting of crime, the use of clandestine devices and subterfuge, the protection of victims of sexual assault, discrimination, financial journalism, the protection of confidential sources, payment for information relating to criminal trials and payments to criminals. It acts once a complaint has been made, however they are selective upon the complaints to take action on. In reaction, they can pass on the information to people who can help i.e. the local police force (usually via the press office); the Coroner or Coroner’s Officer (or the Procurator Fiscal in Scotland); the MP or other elected representative; the hospital(s) and/or NHS authorities dealing with the injured; a solicitor or agent, if one is named; the local religious or other community leader(s); any other representative whose name has been made public. They will also get the offense-causing party to issue a public apology/resolution to the problem.
An example of a case:
COMPLAINANT NAME: Mr John Cleese
CLAUSES NOTED: 1
PUBLICATION: The People
COMPLAINT: Mr John Cleese of Santa Barbara, California, complained that an article gave the misleading impression that he had consulted the Indian ‘laughter guru’ Dr Madan Kataria for personal reasons.
RESOLUTION: The newspaper published a letter of reply from the complainant which clarified that he had not suffered from depression for over twenty years.
REPORT: 55
I think that the PCC is slightly under-performing, however I believe that they would need to have some significant power in order to regulate and call the press into account efficiently. For me, the PCC is also far too closely linked to the media itself, with many of the key figures of the membership working at high positions in areas of the print and broadcasting media.
An example of a case:
COMPLAINANT NAME: Mr John Cleese
CLAUSES NOTED: 1
PUBLICATION: The People
COMPLAINT: Mr John Cleese of Santa Barbara, California, complained that an article gave the misleading impression that he had consulted the Indian ‘laughter guru’ Dr Madan Kataria for personal reasons.
RESOLUTION: The newspaper published a letter of reply from the complainant which clarified that he had not suffered from depression for over twenty years.
REPORT: 55
I think that the PCC is slightly under-performing, however I believe that they would need to have some significant power in order to regulate and call the press into account efficiently. For me, the PCC is also far too closely linked to the media itself, with many of the key figures of the membership working at high positions in areas of the print and broadcasting media.
Statistics Around Regulation
The PCC received 4,340 complaints in 2007 - an increase of 31% on 2006 and the highest number ever received.
Of the complaints that were specified under the terms of the Code of Practice, approximately two in three were about accuracy in reporting and approximately one in five related to intrusion into privacy of some sort.
The top three complaints involved the Daily Mirror, Heat magazine and the Daily Mail.
An Ipsos MORI poll commissioned by the PCC in March 2008 revealed that 42% of web users aged 16-24 knew someone who had been embarrassed by information uploaded on to the internet without their consent. And 78% of the entire adult online population would change information they publish about themselves online if they thought the material would later be reproduced in the mainstream media. In addition, 89% of web users thought there should be clear guidelines about the type of personal information that can be published online so that they can complain if the material is wrong or intrusive.
Of the complaints that were specified under the terms of the Code of Practice, approximately two in three were about accuracy in reporting and approximately one in five related to intrusion into privacy of some sort.
The top three complaints involved the Daily Mirror, Heat magazine and the Daily Mail.
An Ipsos MORI poll commissioned by the PCC in March 2008 revealed that 42% of web users aged 16-24 knew someone who had been embarrassed by information uploaded on to the internet without their consent. And 78% of the entire adult online population would change information they publish about themselves online if they thought the material would later be reproduced in the mainstream media. In addition, 89% of web users thought there should be clear guidelines about the type of personal information that can be published online so that they can complain if the material is wrong or intrusive.
Controversies in Regulation
The PCC has been widely criticised for being ineffective and failing to keep the press in check. It can be argued that because it is funded by the newspaper industry, it will never be able to fulfill it's purpose properly at all. Another controversy of the PCC is that although complaints are free and simple to make, they can only be done once the damage has been done. They also only look properly into a small proportion of complaints, for example in 2002 - only 36 out of 2360 were looked into. A further fault that people find with the PCC is that is has a significant lack of power in giving out penalties, as it can only demand that the offending party offers a publicised apology.
The PCC and Power
The Press Complaints Commission has responsibilities for maintaining the Editorial Code of Practice and ensuring investigation into perceived breaches in the Code. From June 2004, the Code consists of 16 clauses, on accuracy, the opportunity for reply, respect for privacy, harassment, intrusion into shock or grief, the interests of children, the protection of children in sex cases, entry into hospitals, the reporting of crime, the use of clandestine devices and subterfuge, the protection of victims of sexual assault, discrimination, financial journalism, the protection of confidential sources, payment for information relating to criminal trials and payments to criminals. Broadcast media, are already subject to extensive statutory regulations. Today, these are largely set out in the Communications Act 2003 and enforced by OFCOM. The BBC is regulated by its Royal Charter obligations.
The Emergence of Regulation
Following the Second World War, the modern way of press regulation was established. A Royal Commission on the Press was set up in 1947, and in 1949 they recommended the creation of a General Council of the Press to govern the behaviour and actions of the print media. This didn't happen straight away, and it was in 1953 when the General Council was established, although it was funded by newspaper proprietors. The Second Royal Commission of the Press demanded a reform to the General Council. which it heavily criticised for the weaknesses. Reform occurred and it was renamed the Press Council, becoming more authoritative over freedoms of the press and produced some guidelines. However, due to lack of improvement, the Press Complaints Commission was formed to deal with the Code.
Early Days of Press Regulation
Early publications during the 17th century told news and rumours. News periodicals started to be produced to provide news periodically (i.e. once a week, twice a week, daily). At the start of the of the 1600s, the right to print was strictly controlled in England. The first newspaper in the english language was printed in Amsterdam by Joris Veselser around 1620. The demand for news increased around The Civil War - but the publications generally supported one side or the other.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)