Media Law - Regulation and Codes of Conduct

This lecture was our first with Ian Anderson, former News Editor on the BBC 10 O’clock News; so Dan, when you think your job on WINOL is hard, try and fathom how much of a step up it would be to do that on a national programme like the 10 O’clock News.

So to start it is important to remember that regulation and codes are not laws, but often are of the same or higher importance to journalists. With the shadow of Leveson looming large over the whole industry this is an extremely important time in regulation; the PCC (Press Complaints Commission) has been held up in ridicule, journalists are less trusted by the public than ever and newspapers are closing down faster than you can say News of the World. Regulation and codes must work in practice because if they don't then the public does not trust us; if the public doesn't trust us, where do our stories come from? Why do codes matter though? Well all professionals have codes of conduct which occupy the space between actual laws and what is right ethically; so if you break one of your codes of conduct you may not actually be breaking the law but you can still damage your career or even lose your job. Journalism is all about having the trust of the public so it's good to have these codes to guide us in areas like; how far can we go to get a story, what practices are legitimate and when do circumstances make a difference? The Jimmy Savile case which is currently playing out across the media has been extremely damaging to the bond between the BBC and the public. These codes are in place to stop bad practice in journalism in order to gain and maintain public trust.

There are 3 main codes for journalists to remember plus one other which I'll mention briefly later. For newspapers and magazines it is the PCC which of course is in transition at the moment. It's very difficult to define the PCC code at the moment but essentially it is a regulator which deals (or perhaps dealt?) with complaints submitted to them where a journalist has perhaps made a mistake which cannot be rectified by a simple apology in the next edition. Often the PCC has to be the middle man between the complainant and the newspaper, such as in this case, now resolved, where Gordon Brown MP complained to the PCC about something written in The Times about money given to MPs in addition to their parliamentary salary. Since the PCC is run by ex-press people pretty much, the question of how it can be fully independent is ever present. It also has no real power to regulate, offering as it does apologies and a slap on the wrist. The code and regulator for broadcasters is Ofcom who are arguably much less ineffectual than their newspaper regulating cousins. This is mainly because they have real power to regulate in being able to fine people or pull their programmes off air. Think back to the Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross saga, Ofcom fined the hell out of them and it eventually caused the pair to lose their jobs. This was nothing though in comparison to the breach of trust the incident caused. If you don't keep to the Ofcom codes though they can and will take you off air; they license people to broadcast and have no hesitation in giving with one hand and taking away with the other. In comparison to the timid PCC, Ofcom really can hurt an institution with its powers which have to be there to enforce impartiality as well as any legal issues. Impartiality is something which doesn't matter to newspapers, there is no requirement for them to be impartial, yet broadcasters have to be impartial or risk the wrath of Ofcom. Finally we have the BBC code of conduct, available for all to read here and which are, by all accounts, "a great tool for how to do your job well," as spoken by Ian Anderson in our lecture. I won't go into detail on the BBC guidelines as they will only affect you if you get a job with the BBC and since that's a little more niche than getting a job in journalism in general I'll leave it up to you as to whether you want to find out more.

There are times however when as a journalist it may be necessary to not adhere to these ethical rules. In the search for a story, how far is too far? In investigative journalism it may be necessary to secretly film someone or lie in order to get the story. This is obviously not ideal and the only real defence you can have for these sorts of actions is public interest. OK so the story could be true but if it is not in the public interest you lied and cheated to get the story and deserve to be reprimanded. If however it is in the public interest then you should be home and dry. The fake sheik stories in the long gone News of the World were a great example of investigative journalism where rather dodgy tactics were employed to break codes for good reasons. At the moment there is a consultation by the DPP (Director of Public Prosecutions) which is hoping to put a real answer to the question of whether the public interest served by the conduct investigated outweighs the overall criminality of the means of acquiring that information. If yes, run that story dammit; if no, you're going to jail lad.

Finally (oh you thought I meant finally when we were talking about the BBC? Well this is awkward) let's talk about the NUJ. OK so the National Union of Journalists hasn't been as strong ever since Murdoch came along but there are some journalists who still hold its 12 key points sacred. In most other codes there is a focus on privacy but there's a fair more laissez faire attitude to that in the NUJ code of conduct; you can read the whole list here but the one that all journalists should adhere to if they are to be respected and considered trustworthy is the protection of sources. If you are given sensitive information which is entirely possible as a journalist then it is your solemn duty not to reveal the source of this information if you publish the story which you gained from said information. Really though, as long as you make every piece of work you do FAST, ACCURATE and FAIR then you shouldn't have any problems. And how hard can that be?

Until Next Time. Stay Classy Internet.

Goodbye, cruel World

Apologies to the Daily Telegraph for nicking their headline but it's a good one. So yes, as you may have heard, the News of the World phone hacking scandal rolls on taking it's biggest casualty yet as the paper is shut down. It was founded in 1843, bought by Rupert Murdoch and his News Ltd company in 1969 and is scheduled to close this Sunday the 10th of July in the wake of the phone hacking scandal.

Is the closure of the News of the World honestly addressing the problem? Already shouts have gone up from some media commentators at the cynical way in which the paper has been closed as a scapegoat for other, much more troubling issues. The first of which is Rebekah Brooks (nee Wade) still holds her job as head of News International when the majority of the hacking took place leading some to joke that Murdoch has gotten rid of the wrong red top (make the connections yourself, you're not stupid). I suppose you could be wondering what is so terrible about the hacking, after all, it was only celebrities hacked right? Sienna Miller won compensation, Andy Gray was hacked as was Hugh Grant (more on him later) and OK the odd politician like John Prescott but what's the big deal. Well I'll tell you. It wasn't just celebrities, in the last week alone we have discovered that the Private Investigators seemingly hired by the NotW hacked the then missing Milly Dowler's phone, the parents of one of the victims of the Soham murders, the families of those killed in the 7/7 bombings and families of soldiers killed on duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. Now this may seem bad enough or it may seem absolutely acceptable depending on your point of view but where they unequivocally crossed the line to me is when they deleted messages on Milly Dowler's phone to make room for more from worried family members, leading her family to believe she was still accessing her phone and therefore still alive which by this time she had sadly met her end.

The actions have been described variously as disgusting, unacceptable and all sorts of other big words which fail to actually bring about any real outcome. It seems that an enquiry will come but how soon and how independent, especially important given that there is a suggestion of corruption in the Metropolitan Police Force. The Police are currently holding their own enquiry and according to Chris Grayling, a judicial enquiry cannot run alongside it. Not knowing the law on this I cannot comment with much authority but I cannot understand why the two can not run concurrently. the suggestion by other panellists was that because the government is 'in bed with Murdoch' as the slightly sordid sounding phrase goes, they want to leave the enquiry as long as possible in the hope that we the public will somehow forget about it. And they are right. We need to act now to get to the bottom of this, this could be one of the most important times for the media, the government and even the public at large. The Press Complaints Commission (PCC) have been criticised, seen as an ineffective way of controlling the press but as their Chairman has pointed out in various interviews and press conferences, you can't regulate a company which consistently lies to you.

In yesterday's Question Time, Hugh Grant, a victim of the hacking himself, went down very well amongst the general public with his views on the NotW, Murdoch and has become a crusader against the hacking which, if nothing else has ensured his movie career will continue for years to come. One thing however was brought to my attention after the programme that, as a training journalist bothered me. Grant at one point spoke of a change in the way in which the press are regulated, something which many would agree with but the draconian measures he seemed to suggest the like of which haven't been seen since the 1800s and although he resorted in the end to cheap digs about Grant's tabloid past, Jon Gaunt was right in saying that too much regulation on the press will mean we no longer have a free press. A free press being essential in a true democracy to hold to account politicians, businessmen and the like.

Something that worried me in all the accusations and revelations was the reaction of the other newspapers to the stories. On the day after the biggest revelations that Milly Dowler's phone was hacked and messages were deleted, the reaction was less than some expected. The Daily Mail for example had a small front page article, a page inside and a small piece in the comment section of the paper. You can be sure it was the same across the board. Take what you want from this but it suggests that the hacking practice was not limited to the News of the World. To think however as some do that this makes all journalists scum is to be more foolish and naive than you could imagine. With the closure of the News of the World we lose the biggest selling newspaper in this country and around 200 staff will lose their jobs as the paper closes. Not all of these people would have been involved in the hacking, most will be PR people and journalists who were just going about their own business doing quality journalism on what used to be a quality newspaper.

As a final thought what will happen with Rupert Murdoch's take over of BSkyB. The decision will obviously be postponed but surely recent events will stop the sale which appeared to be taking place despite laws which should prevent any one person owning such a high percentage of the media. Will Rebekah Brooks ever leave? Andy Coulson has today been arrested and how long can Murdoch protect Brooks with the comprehensive investigations and inquiries ahead of us. Her ability to stay on has lead to many speculating on what it she has (from a nuclear bomb to bikini pictures of Murdoch. Obviously a twitter source). What will it mean for journalists in the future? The phone hacking scandal has surely changed the face of journalism forever leaving common practices of journos in doubt. As always stick with this blog for any developments, as I'm writing this blog the story is no doubt already changing and I'll have missed some new revelation. Such is the nature of news in the new media age.

Until Next Time. Stay Classy Internet.
(and check your phone hasn't been hacked, the police are contacting over 4000 people so it might have been).

Some good links for you on the subject:
Daily Mail Cameron's response
Guardian NotW Closure
Fellow Student blogs. Ewan Kennerell and Daniel Mackrell

News Corp, BSkyB and Murdoch - What's up with that?

So today we get the confirmation that our Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt has approved News Corps plan for Sky News as they complete the takeover of BSkyB. That's essentially the whole of the story but of course, when it comes to takeovers and Murdoch there's always a little bit more.

Here's what is being planned, from today's Guardian:
"The culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt, has approved News Corporation's plan to spin off Sky News, clearing the way for its proposed £8bn purchase of the 61% of BSkyB it does not already own. Under the deal, the loss-making news subsidiary will be spun off into a new publicly listed company called Newco, and will be independently funded for 10 years. News Corporation is to license the Sky News brand to the operation for seven years, providing an incentive to renew a second funding deal. News Corporation will have a 39.1% stake in the venture with the other shareholders made up of existing investors in BSkyB."

What worries me, is that even with this new independent company Newco having its own board and chairman, separate to News Corp, the fact that the majority of investors come from News Corp and their buddies at BSkyB means they have the control, not only of BSkyB but of a supposedly now independent Sky News.

Anyhow, the full story is available to read on the Guardian website by clicking here.

What this will mean for the news, journalists, and just everyday people is as yet unknown.

Until next time. Stay Classy Internet.

P.S. My fellow student of Journalism has done a couple of blogs on this very subject and if you're interested it would be worthwhile checking out his page by clicking here.