Are MPs the best people to judge?

THE Levison Report is 2,000 pages long and was composed over a nine-month period and apparently poses many of the questions highlighted by its six predecessors.

Our leader is either a fantastic speed reader or has no intention of being confused by the facts.

Either way it seems a vast waste of resources to set up such an extensive and far reaching study if it is to be yet another report on press behaviour destined for the long grass.

With their current track record, one wonders if politicians are the best people to judge on the moral standards of our press.

If we are being asked to trust them, a little more activity in putting their own house in order would not go amiss.

JA Whitmore, Springfield Road, York.

 

• THE Leveson Report has finally arrived: Four volumes after 18 months of listening to more than 370 witnesses – at a cost to the taxpayer of about £8 million.

What a waste of time and money. Much of what the press did that was so awful was illegal (i.e. phone hacking, bribing the police, stalking relatives of celebrities, hounding folk in their homes, making false and libelous accusations, etc) so there is no need for new legislation.

The laws were simply not enforced. The politicians were too close to the press. Too much power and influence was in the hands of too few newspaper owners, and the Press Complaints Council never worked as it should.

We need a free press to keep politicians in check, and to be able to carry out legitimate investigating journalism, and we will lose this if politicians can bring fines to bear, on misbehaving newspapers. The press cannot be trusted to police itself, so having a genuinely independent body to set up a press code is a good idea; but who are these independent folk to be?

David Quarrie, Lynden Way, Holgate, York.

 

• There is a real danger of the Leveson Report becoming a bandwagon to state censorship.

Just as we would not condemn all disc jockeys because of Jimmy Savile, so we should not punish all newspapers because of a minority of national dailies.

Newspapers that act illegally and print false stories can already be brought to account if existing laws and procedures are properly pursued.

Indeed they have. The News of the World is defunct. Huge compensation sums have been paid and individuals are facing court proceedings.

Statutory regulation of the press is not the way forward. A genuine free press is essential and there must never be any political control or threat of control either directly or indirectly.

Our party leaders might not be seen as likely contenders for despotism, but this might not always be the case. Remember in 1933, Adolph Hitler came to power through the ballot box. A future extremist of the right or left might abuse regulations to ensure that newspapers printed only what suited those in power.

This must never be allowed to become even a remote possibility.

Matthew Laverack, Lord Mayor’s Walk, York.

Comments (11)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:50pm Tue 4 Dec 12

Buzz Light-year says...

A future extremist of the right or left might abuse regulations to ensure that newspapers printed only what suited those in power.

This must never be allowed to become even a remote possibility.


It's already happening. Right here.
[quote] A future extremist of the right or left might abuse regulations to ensure that newspapers printed only what suited those in power. This must never be allowed to become even a remote possibility.[/quote] It's already happening. Right here. Buzz Light-year

3:36pm Tue 4 Dec 12

capt spaulding says...

Buzz Light-year wrote:
A future extremist of the right or left might abuse regulations to ensure that newspapers printed only what suited those in power.

This must never be allowed to become even a remote possibility.


It's already happening. Right here.
Im with you Buzz Ive read our esteemed leaders Tweets. If he has his way we are history.
[quote][p][bold]Buzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: [quote] A future extremist of the right or left might abuse regulations to ensure that newspapers printed only what suited those in power. This must never be allowed to become even a remote possibility.[/quote] It's already happening. Right here.[/p][/quote]Im with you Buzz Ive read our esteemed leaders Tweets. If he has his way we are history. capt spaulding

3:50pm Tue 4 Dec 12

Ichabod76 says...

Ed Miliband also wants the press regulated
So maybe James is just showing him what a good boy he is
Ed Miliband also wants the press regulated So maybe James is just showing him what a good boy he is Ichabod76

5:05pm Tue 4 Dec 12

Ichabod76 says...

why have mine and others posts been removed
their was no offensive comments ?
why have mine and others posts been removed their was no offensive comments ? Ichabod76

6:38pm Tue 4 Dec 12

capt spaulding says...

All the Manila Thriller comments have been pulled allready ? Looks like James is getting his way.
I Just dare him to organise a Philipine holiday junket now
I for one will picket the Guildhall if he does..
All the Manila Thriller comments have been pulled allready ? Looks like James is getting his way. I Just dare him to organise a Philipine holiday junket now I for one will picket the Guildhall if he does.. capt spaulding

6:39pm Tue 4 Dec 12

capt spaulding says...

Ichabod76 wrote:
why have mine and others posts been removed
their was no offensive comments ?
Because they can
[quote][p][bold]Ichabod76[/bold] wrote: why have mine and others posts been removed their was no offensive comments ?[/p][/quote]Because they can capt spaulding

7:02pm Tue 4 Dec 12

Buzz Light-year says...

So, earlier Ichabod76 was surprised comments were allowed on a letter published in today's Press.
Well surprise surprise they aren't now.
Despite there being nothing offensive or malicious to remove.

Here is a tweet regarding that letter:

James Alexander ‏@jmalexander1982
Anybody think it is wrong for @yorkpress to give credibility to such nasty letters? @PressSteveH #notgoingphilippines

He then shows a screenshot of Charles Rushton's letter.

I think Mr A is getting carried away.
Okay, it's understandable he's miffed that there have in the past been some personal and nasty comments. Fair point but par for the course *worldwide*.

His proposed solution? Pressure The Press to change their comments registration in line with the process for the letters page to remove the aspect of anonymity.

So, regular correspondent Charles Rushton of Pasture Close York follows that protocol, does exactly what Mr A proposes but apparently still falls foul of Mr A's quality guidelines.

What *any* discerning reader of The Press knows is this:
When The Press publish a letter, they are publishing the opinion of a member of the public.
The act of publishing someone's opinion on a forum for discussion does NOT mean the host is giving the opinion credibility. They are publishing opinion to stimulate debate.
Which doesn't work when those in power seek to stifle that debate.

I'm clever enough to read something and work out for myself whether it is salacious backbiting or not. I would have hoped the people my peers voted into power were the same.
So, earlier Ichabod76 was surprised comments were allowed on a letter published in today's Press. Well surprise surprise they aren't now. Despite there being nothing offensive or malicious to remove. Here is a tweet regarding that letter: [quote]James Alexander ‏@jmalexander1982 Anybody think it is wrong for @yorkpress to give credibility to such nasty letters? @PressSteveH #notgoingphilippines[/quote] He then shows a screenshot of Charles Rushton's letter. I think Mr A is getting carried away. Okay, it's understandable he's miffed that there have in the past been some personal and nasty comments. Fair point but par for the course *worldwide*. His proposed solution? Pressure The Press to change their comments registration in line with the process for the letters page to remove the aspect of anonymity. So, regular correspondent Charles Rushton of Pasture Close York follows that protocol, does exactly what Mr A proposes but apparently still falls foul of Mr A's quality guidelines. What *any* discerning reader of The Press knows is this: When The Press publish a letter, they are publishing the opinion of a member of the public. The act of publishing someone's opinion on a forum for discussion does NOT mean the host is giving the opinion credibility. They are publishing opinion to stimulate debate. Which doesn't work when those in power seek to stifle that debate. I'm clever enough to read something and work out for myself whether it is salacious backbiting or not. I would have hoped the people my peers voted into power were the same. Buzz Light-year

7:06pm Tue 4 Dec 12

Buzz Light-year says...

I'll quote Mr Laverack's extremely prescient and pertinent line again:

A future extremist of the right or left might abuse regulations to ensure that newspapers printed only what suited those in power.

This must never be allowed to become even a remote possibility.
I'll quote Mr Laverack's extremely prescient and pertinent line again: [quote]A future extremist of the right or left might abuse regulations to ensure that newspapers printed only what suited those in power. This must never be allowed to become even a remote possibility.[/quote] Buzz Light-year

1:27pm Wed 5 Dec 12

Buzz Light-year says...

Further.
I signed up to Twitter to address Mr Alexander's question over Mr Rushton's letter.
Not only was I ignored but somehow Mr A (who claims to be "new to Twitter") can fix it so my comment doesn't show on his feed when you expand his original tweet.

How's that done? *I'm* new to Twitter.

It looks like not only does Mr Alexander want control over the local paper's output but his Twitter feed appears to be manipulated to remove any criticisms or valid counterpoint.

Count me out as a Labour voter.
Further. I signed up to Twitter to address Mr Alexander's question over Mr Rushton's letter. Not only was I ignored but somehow Mr A (who claims to be "new to Twitter") can fix it so my comment doesn't show on his feed when you expand his original tweet. How's that done? *I'm* new to Twitter. It looks like not only does Mr Alexander want control over the local paper's output but his Twitter feed appears to be manipulated to remove any criticisms or valid counterpoint. Count me out as a Labour voter. Buzz Light-year

2:12pm Wed 5 Dec 12

Ichabod76 says...

Buzz Light-year wrote:
Further.
I signed up to Twitter to address Mr Alexander's question over Mr Rushton's letter.
Not only was I ignored but somehow Mr A (who claims to be "new to Twitter") can fix it so my comment doesn't show on his feed when you expand his original tweet.

How's that done? *I'm* new to Twitter.

It looks like not only does Mr Alexander want control over the local paper's output but his Twitter feed appears to be manipulated to remove any criticisms or valid counterpoint.

Count me out as a Labour voter.
Ha Ha you couldn't make it up !!!

I asked James if he wanted to be a Politician or a Press Editor and he's removed me somehow also

Don't worry though I took a screen shot and tweeted it to lots of his best mates
Miliband ect
[quote][p][bold]Buzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: Further. I signed up to Twitter to address Mr Alexander's question over Mr Rushton's letter. Not only was I ignored but somehow Mr A (who claims to be "new to Twitter") can fix it so my comment doesn't show on his feed when you expand his original tweet. How's that done? *I'm* new to Twitter. It looks like not only does Mr Alexander want control over the local paper's output but his Twitter feed appears to be manipulated to remove any criticisms or valid counterpoint. Count me out as a Labour voter.[/p][/quote]Ha Ha you couldn't make it up !!! I asked James if he wanted to be a Politician or a Press Editor and he's removed me somehow also Don't worry though I took a screen shot and tweeted it to lots of his best mates Miliband ect Ichabod76

3:47pm Thu 6 Dec 12

TheTruthHurts says...

My comment got removed too
My comment got removed too TheTruthHurts

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree