UK News Censor

 UK proposes state controlled news censor



 Update: Quick and Nasty...

Scottish report following on from Leveson proposes a very wide net of news censorship


Link Here 16th March 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor

  mcclusky A rather lightweight report on the regulation of the press in Scotland has recommended statutory controls underpinned by law which applies to all news media no matter how small.

John McCluskey was invited to chair a committee by First Minister Alex Salmond after the Leveson Report. The McCluskey report concluded that a voluntary code was unlikely to work, but opposition parties at Holyrood described the proposals as draconian .

The former high court judge and solicitor general chaired a group set up to recommend press regulation reforms in Scotland.

His report recommended the creation of an independent, non-statutory, regulatory body of a character to be proposed by the press , alongside an independent body with responsibility for ensuring that the independent regulatory body complies at all times with the Leveson principles .

The expert group said that if Westminster fails to create a UK-wide press regulator, Holyrood should create one.

The regulator could have the power to censor newspapers, magazines and websites, including gossip sites, while the expert group said further regulation of social media may also be required.

The co-convener of the Scottish Greens, Patrick Harvie, said his party supported the implementation of the Leveson proposals. But he added:

The McCluskey report appears to go much further than anyone had expected.

To include every source of news coverage would result in a torrent of complaints about every website, every blog, even every single tweet. I cannot see how this is remotely practical, even if it was desirable.

If the will exists in Scotland to see the Leveson proposals implemented, it should not be beyond our ability to ensure that professional, commercial media organisations are properly regulated, but individual citizens are not caught up in the same system.

Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont said:

We agreed with the first minister that this group should look solely at the technicalities of implementing Leveson in Scots law. We did not agree to the Leveson recommendations being re-written or built upon.

While Lord McCluskey and his fellow panel members are not to be criticised, rather than pursue the original agreed objective they were asked to rework Leveson on a ridiculously short timescale.

That in itself appears to be bad faith on the first minister's part. We hope he will take forward the recommendation that Scotland would be best served by having a UK-wide solution.

Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson accused the first minister of trying to shackle a free press at a time of the utmost political sensitivity .

 

 Update: Breaking News...

Major political parties come to an accord on plans for a new UK news censor


Link Here 19th March 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor

camercon clegg milibandA shellshocked newspaper industry was struggling to come to terms with a sudden all-party agreement to create a powerful new press censor.

The nominally independent censor seems be subject to state approval and will have powers to impose fines and demand prominent corrections. Courts will be allowed to impose exemplary damages on newspapers that fail to join the body.

All three party leaders hailed the historic deal, sealed in extraordinary late-night talks on Sunday in the office of the Labour leader Ed Miliband after months of wrangling, but many of the country's leading newspaper publishers were ominously wary.

Under the deal, the newspaper industry has lost its power to veto appointments to the body that will replace the Press Complaints Commission.

In a statement, Associated Newspapers, News International, the Telegraph Media Group and the Express's publishers, Northern & Shell, said they would be taking high-level legal advice before deciding if they could join the new watchdog. The deal, they said, raised several deeply contentious issues.

No representative of the newspaper and magazine industry had any involvement in, or indeed any knowledge of, the cross-party talks on press regulation that took place on Sunday night, they said. We have only late this afternoon seen the royal charter that the political parties have agreed between themselves and, more pertinently, the recognition criteria, early drafts of which contained several deeply contentious issues which have not yet been resolved with the industry.

Alan Rusbridger, the Guardian's editor-in-chief, gave a cautious welcome to the deal. He said:

We welcome the fact that there has been cross-party agreement. The regulatory settlement is by and large a fair one, with compromises on all sides. We retain grave reservations about the proposed legislation on exemplary damages. The agreed terms are not ideal but after two years of inquiry and debate we finally have the prospect of what the public wants - a robust regulator that is independent of both press and politics. It's a big improvement on what went before.

Downing Street sought to reassure small-scale web-based news providers and blogs that they would not be required to co-operate with the new regulatory system. No 10 said bloggers, tweeters, news aggregators and social networking sites such as Facebook or Twitter, as well as special interest titles, would be excluded, but there was concern that a workable definition of these would be difficult to come up with.

 

 Extract: Justice Based on Pakistan's Blasphemy Law...

Forbes points out the reprehensible injustice behind 'exemplary' damages cited in new UK news censorship law. Innocent people can be screwed by mere accusations, regardless of how baseless they are


Link Here 20th March 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor

forbes logoThe British Government Has Decided To Censor The Entire World's Press And Media

They've agreed a law which effectively censors the entire world's media. And they've done this simply because they are ignorant of the very laws they're trying to change. Which is, I think you'll agree, a little disturbing, that politicians would casually negate press freedom just because they don't know what they're doing.

The problem is the particular restrictions that they've decided to bring in. Essentially, to be a news or current affairs publisher then you must be registered as such with some regulatory body. That this is a despicable idea goes without saying: it's a reversal of the past three hundred years of liberty where we've been allowed to say or print whatever we damn well want to subject only to the laws of libel, incitement to immediate violence and pressing concerns of national security (and even that last was a voluntary matter). If there's a complaint about something you've published then that regulatory body can get you to correct it, apologise, pay damages and so on. And of course we all worry that this will then morph into more direct control of the press.

The basis of the English legal system is that yes, of course, you can bring a case against anyone you like for whatever you want to allege. But the limit on people doing so is that if they lose said case then they've got to pay the legal costs of the defendant. This is how we prevent most (but sadly not all) frivolous cases from ever making it to court. You have to take a risk in bringing a case.

Note that, if you're a publisher who is not regulated, then you won't get your defense costs paid even if you do win. Therefore there will be costs associated with being complained about: whether that complaint has any justification or none. This does rather leave all press outlets open to shakedowns from anyone and everyone.

...Read the full article

 

 Update: Introducing the UK News and Internet Censor...

So will websites be liable to astronomic and unjust 'exemplary' damages?


Link Here 21st March 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor

camercon clegg milibandThe very worrying establishment of a UK news and internet censor has been rushing through parliament with the lack of scrutiny and consideration that you would expect given a 3 party stitch up.

See  Hansard transcriptions of the latest debate from  publications.parliament.uk

See Bill amendments containing the new laws [pdf] from publications.parliament.uk

Press regulation deal sparks fears of high libel fines for bloggers

See article from guardian.co.uk

Bloggers could face high fines for libel under the new Leveson deal with exemplary damages imposed if they don't sign up to the new regulator, it was claimed on Tuesday.

Under clause 29 introduced to the crime and courts bill in the Commons on Monday night, the definition of relevant bloggers or websites includes any that generate news material where there is an editorial structure giving someone control over publication.

Bloggers would not be at risk of exemplary damages for comments posted by readers. There is also a schedule that excludes certain publishers such as scientific journals, student publications and not-for-profit community newspapers. Websites are guaranteed exclusion from exemplary damages if they can get on this list.

Kirsty Hughes, the chief executive of Index on Censorship, which campaigns for press freedom around the world, said it was a sad day for British democracy. This will undoubtedly have a chilling effect on everyday people's web use, she said.

She said she feared thousands of websites could fall under the definition of a relevant publisher in clause 29. Hughes said:

Bloggers could find themselves subject to exemplary damages, due to the fact that they were not part of a regulator that was not intended for them in the first place.

There does seem to be two exclusions to signing up for censorship. Solo bloggers seem to be excluded as the law only applies to websites with multiple (presumably two) authors. There is also an exclusion for single interest publications, but definition are vague enough that this will be worthless when courts get involved and interpret the rules to suit the authorities.

Offsite: An in-depth examination of the bill's clauses about liability to news censorship

See  article from  ministryoftruth.me.uk

There are doubts that the censor will be able to address all the issues anyway

See  article from  guardian.co.uk

The Leveson-inspired draft bill deals with the past, not the future, of the press in failing to address the myriad ways we now receive news' What Miller seems to want to define is a news business , which fails to admit any complexity at all in the news ecosystem as it is presently constructed.

The press is melting before our very eyes, and the public it served is trickling away in a thousand different streams. The impact a story has now is as much dependent on the network it travels through as on the news brand that presents it.

The sole blogger , or even a person in possession of a microblogging Twitter account, can have as devastating effect on any number of lives as the front page of a tabloid newspaper. Under Miller's definition of press , the richest and most powerful publishers of all, Google, Facebook, and Twitter, are arguably exempt because they do not seek to exercise editorial control or indeed report news as part of a business model. It would be interesting to know whether Miller views an algorithm as editorial control . I suspect not, even though by most definitions it is just that. It was once the case that to reach a broad audience you needed an industrial publishing complex behind you, whereas now, you just need a mobile phone.

And the buzzards are already circling

See  article from  mirror.co.uk

'Cut the wire ' Max Mosley calls for websites to be closed down if they flout new Press watchdog rules

His remarks were condemned by anti-censorship campaigners claiming it would turn Britain into a totalitarian state like China or Iran

 

 Update: Such Serious Issues Debated at Such Irresponsible Speed...

Realisation that a whole host of tiny websites, including Big Brother Watch, would be covered by the provisions of the new press regulator


Link Here 22nd March 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor

House of Lords logoBig Brother Watch writes:

As the bell tolls for press freedom, the realisation that a whole host of tiny websites, including Big Brother Watch, would be covered by the provisions of the new press regulator is dawning on Westminster.

On Monday, the Lords will vote on the legislation underpinning the Royal Charter on press-self regulation. They will determine who is to be a relevant publisher and at present risks catching broadly any site that is has more than one author, carries news or information about current affairs, or gossip about celebrities, and has some kind of editorial control.

We are urgently trying to garner support for the below amendment to exclude small organisations from the provisions of what is already becoming an unwieldy and unpredictable piece of legislative horse trading.

This is not an ideal situation -- as with most things formulated in meetings at 2am -- and it would make much more sense for this to be handled rationally and thought through properly. This amendment protects a few, but the principle has already gone.

We are still looking for a peer to table this amendment -- any help is appreciated -- please call the office on 0207 3406030.

--

Insert into New Schedule 5 of the Crime and Courts Bill Exclusions from definition of "relevant publisher"

9) "A publisher who does not exceed the definition of a small or medium-sized enterprise as defined in Section 382 and 465 Companies Act 2006."

Let us be clear

The manner in which this has been brought to bear, in 2am meetings with lobbyists, no civil society input, rushed drafting and ill-considered consequences should not be the way to make law. Indeed, we cannot think of a worse way to make law.

See  article from  bigbrotherwatch.org.uk

Meeting Hacked Off

The explosive revelations that websites will be included in the post-Leveson press regulation arrangements this weekend led to a flurry of analysis --- and a meeting between Hacked Off, bloggers and free speech groups yesterday.

See  article from  openrightsgroup.org

 

 Update: Censorship Objects...

Establishing a British news and internet censor is not enough for the gender extremists of Object


Link Here 24th March 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor

object logoObject writes:

Half-Hearted Implementation of Leveson Recommendations is Missed Opportunity for Fair and Equal Representation of Women in the Media

Equality Now, Eaves, Object and the End Violence Against Women Coalition welcome the decision by the government to implement at least the majority of Lord Justice Leveson's recommendations -- particularly in relation to permitting third-party complaints. However, we consider the currently proposed plan of implementation to be a missed opportunity.

Holly Dustin of the End Violence Against Women Coalition said:

The much-compromised plan does not provide any guidance about women's equality in the new code; it does not propose that any representative of the equality sector might be part of the new body, and it has made no attempt to bring consistency between the broadcast watershed and print media in terms of sexually explicit material.

 

  Using a Hammer to Crack a Blog...

Government seems keen to censor small bloggers, so as to ensure that anything bigger doesn't slip through the net


Link Here 26th March 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor

Big Brother Watch logo Big Brother Watch writes:

We have highlighted that the current drafting of relevant publisher for the purposes of the Leveson law risks capturing blogs and organisations like Big Brother Watch in a system of regulation never intended for them.

The Government's amendment to the Crime and Courts Bill exempts a person who publishes a small-scale blog from the definition of relevant publisher is an attempt to deal with growing concern, as demonstrated by the 20 person signatory letter in Saturday's Guardian.

Sadly the amendment offers no definition of what is small scale or how it relates to an organisation who publishes the blog in question, so the compromise arguably makes the situation worse. The first time an organisation is sued as being a relevant publisher would have to fight in court to prove they are not -- or risk facing exemplary damages. That could be a hefty legal bill and for small organisations a fight they might not be able to even consider, let alone see to the end.

However the Government stills seems keen to only exclude the tiniest of the tiny

See  article from  guardian.co.uk .

The government has moved to exclude small-scale bloggers from the threat of media regulation, and will hold a mini-consultation with the newspaper industry on how best to construct a workable definition of the bloggers that need to be protected.

Ministers concede that the definitions offered so far may have loopholes, and will attempt to put in place a clear watertight amendment after Easter when the crown and courts bill returns to the Commons.

Lord McNally, the justice minister, said the government's aim was to bring under the ambit of the regulator only the main elements of the press as well as what he defined as press-like activity online. He said:

I have seen over the past week some concerns voiced regarding the extent to which bloggers and tweeters may be caught.

Clearly, the online version of the national press or their regional counterparts, or indeed an online press-like news site, carry with them very different public expectations when compared with a small-scale blog or for that matter a tweet.

 

 Update: How Small is Smallish...

Mini-consultation on small publisher exemption from news censorship


Link Here 28th March 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor

camercon clegg milibandBloggers will be offered a three-week mini-consultation period, a senior source from the Labour party has told Liberal Conspiracy, to help draft the legislation on web regulation.

The controversial legislation on press and web regulation is likely to be finalised in mid-April. The currently drafted rules exclude various types of publishers including the BBC and other broadcasters, special interest magazines and political parties.

A senior source from the shadow media team said the three political parties were looking for the right definition of a small blog.

This [definition] has to steer a path between exempting blogs that are really small and not providing a legal loophole so that newspapers get exemption on all their online activity or are encouraged to avoid the law by restructuring themselves into a series of small bodies.

We also need to future-proof the law so that as papers gradually move online, we don't see a slide back into the old world.

The aim of the consultation is to determine how to measure size: whether by company turnover, readership, number of staff or some combination.

Comment: Letter to the Guardian

See  article from  openrightsgroup.org

Open Rights Group logo Dear Editor,

The Leveson Inquiry was set up to address the culture, practices and ethics of the press, including contacts between the press and politicians and the press and the police . Our views diverge on whether the outcome of the Leveson process -- and the plans for a new regulator -- are the best way forward. But where we all agree is that current attempts at regulating blogs and other small independent news websites are critically flawed.

The government has defined a relevant publisher for the purposes of press regulation in a way that seeks to draft campaign groups and community-run websites covering neighbourhood planning applications and local council affairs into a regulator designed for the Guardian, Sun and Daily Mail.

Even the smallest of websites will be threatened with the stick of punitive exemplary damages if they fall foul of a broad range of torts, encompassing everything from libel to breach of confidence . The authors of these proposals should reflect on their remarkable achievement of uniting both Tom Watson and Rupert Murdoch in opposition.

This appears to be the outcome of a botched late-night drafting process and complete lack of consultation with bloggers, online journalists and social media users, who may now be caught in regulations which trample on grassroots democratic activity and Britain's emerging digital economy.

Leveson was meant to be focused on the impact of big media . In the end it may come to be seen as a damaging attack on Britain's blogosphere, which rather than being a weakness in British politics, has proved time and time again that it is a real strength.

We will all continue to write, campaign, cajole, amuse and irritate online. But we consider the current proposals a fundamental threat to doing just that.

 

 Offsite Article: Accepting Leveson means accepting we have lost...


Link Here 29th March 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor
Spiked logo The current nitpicking about the details of the shabby Royal Charter deal is not nearly enough to defend press freedom. By Mick Hume

See article from spiked-online.com

 

 Update: Consultation for bloggers on the new Crime and Courts Bill...

The Media Reform Coalition are surveying opinions on how to exclude bloggers and small entities from UK news censorship


Link Here 5th April 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor

media reform coalition logo The Media Reform Coalition has launched a consultation for small publishers, online bloggers and journalists to speak up on the new press regulation deal.

On April 15 the House of Commons will return from Easter recess, and soon after that will consider the Crime and Courts Bill -- a crucial part of the statutory backing to the new Royal Charter which provides for independent media self-regulation.

But the Bill as currently drafted has some big problems : it doesn't adequately protect small publishers from punishments intended for media moguls and it doesn't provide the legal backing for them to join or form a regulator further down the line.

Click here to take our survey without further ado!

The House of Lords has shown clear intention to solve these issues by adding a holding amendment excluding "small-scale bloggers", but we need to lobby the Commons to transform this into something clear, versatile and workable. That's why we want your input.

Maria Miller, the relevant Secretary of State, has made noises about consulting with the 'newspaper industry' over the Easter recess. She has said nothing about engaging with other kinds of news organisations -- hence this consultation.

We hope to rally small publishers, online news sites and bloggers behind a set of proposal so that we can collectively lobby all three parties to make sure the C&C Bill does the job it should.

The consultation comes in three parts:

The survey focuses primarily on who you think should be liable for exemplary damages and cost penalties, and who you think should get the benefits It lists several options for the protection of small publishers, such as excluding non-profit organisations or setting an income threshold for inclusion as a "relevant publisher".

It also asks whether the costs benefits of joining a recognised self-regulator should be available to anyone who joins, regardless of whether they are a "relevant publisher" -- and whether respondents would join an affordable regulator if it made costs protection available to them.

The responses to the consultation will be used to provide the political parties with input on the clauses going through Parliament after the Easter recess that will affect small news organisations.

If you are a small publisher, online writer, or blogger of any kind, we want to hear from you. Please do look over our documents and take our survey -- and spread it around to as many people as you can!

 

 Update: Micro-Exemptions...

The Government proposes to exempt micro-companies (less than 10 employees) from having to sign up to the planned news censor


Link Here 20th April 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor

UK Government armsThe Government writes about the need for bloggers and small media companies having to sign up to the proposed news censor:

Following the initial debate in Parliament, we have refined the clauses to make it absolutely clear that small blogs are outside of the scheme.

The amendments, which have cross-party agreement, make clear that small blogs will not be classed as relevant publishers , and be considered by the House of Commons on Monday April 22.

The provisions in the Crime and Courts Bill clauses detail the four tests that must be met to be considered a relevant publisher, which are:

  • publish news-related material

  • publish in the course of a business

  • written by different authors

  • subject to editorial controls

Micro-business blogs

The amendments clarify the government's position on small blogs by further defining the exemption for blogs that are classed as micro-businesses - business with fewer than 10 employees and an annual turnover below 2 million. This is the definition used by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.

Despite not falling under the definition of relevant publisher, any publication that is exempt as a micro-business as a result of these amendments could still choose to join a regulator and receive the legal benefits otherwise only available to relevant publishers in the regulator. That means protection from exemplary damages. It also means that use of the arbitral arm in the regulator will be taken into account by the court when awarding costs.

Additional exemptions

The clauses also list certain categories of publications which are exempt, even when those tests are met. These exemptions include special interest titles, scientific or academic journals, broadcasters and book publishers as as well as a public body, charity or company that publishes news about their activities.

 

 Update: Political Interference...

Major newspapers reject the newspaper censor proposed by political parties


Link Here 26th April 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor

newspapersThe majority of the newspaper industry, made up of five of the country's largest press groups, have rejected cross-party plans for newspaper censorship and launched a bid to set up their own royal charter-backed body.

News International, the publisher of the Sun and Times, the Telegraph Media Group, the Daily Mail's publisher Associated Newspapers, Trinity Mirror and Express Newspapers published a draft royal charter saying they rejected the stitch-up put together by the three political parties.

The newspapers said the original government royal charter unveiled on 15 March and endorsed by parliament:

Has no support within the press. A number of its recommendations are unworkable and it gives politicians an unacceptable degree of interference in the regulation of the press.

David Cameron said he was very happy to look at the proposals and his aides said he needed time to examine the gaps between what the parties had agreed and the industry was proposing.

But a spokesman for the culture department stood firm by the original plans endorsed by the Commons and Lords:

We want to see a tough, independent self-regulator implemented swiftly. The royal charter published on 18 March followed 21 weeks of discussion and has cross-party agreement.

 

 Update: Stop Press...

Government plans for a news censor put on hold to give time to consider alternative plan proposed by newspaper editors


Link Here 4th May 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor

House of Commons logo The Government's proposal for a Royal Charter on the future of news censorship has been put on hold after newspaper editors put forward an alternative plan.

The Royal Charter was due to be signed by the Queen when she chaired the next meeting of the Privy Council on May 15, but it has now been taken off the agenda for the meeting so the Government can hold more talks with editors.

Editors are unhappy with an element of statutory underpinning in the Government's proposal, and last month they published their own proposal for a Royal Charter, which would remove Parliament's proposed power to make changes to the regulatory system without the agreement of the industry.

 

 Update: Independent Press Standards Organisation...

Newspapers announce their plans for a self censorship body with very real teeth


Link Here 9th July 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor

fright night A news censor for the press with very real teeth could be established within three or four months to break the political impasse over royal charters, according to a Trinity Mirror executive involved with the project.

Paul Vickers, the legal director of the Daily Mirror and Sunday Mirror, said the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) was being fast-tracked in an attempt to kill off accusations that big newspaper groups are conspiring to delay the introduction of a new censor backed by royal charter.  Vickers told BBC Radio 4's The World at One:

What were doing today is setting up a mechanism for creating a self-regulatory system. It's not dependent on a royal charter.

It will take some months to set up because we are following proper public appointment processes. It will be three or four months at the shortest before it's set up.

Draft proposals for setting up Ipso were announced in a joint statement by companies including Rupert Murdoch's News UK, the Daily Mail publisher, Associated Newspapers, and Telegraph Media Group. They said Ipso would be a complete break with the past and would deliver all the key Leveson recommendations for reform of press regulation.

Vickers said Ipso would have an investigative arm and would impose tough sanctions on errant publishers, including fines of up to £ 1m for systemic wrongdoing, giving it absolute teeth, very real teeth . Ipso will also offer a whistleblowers' hotline to allow journalists to object to editors who ask them to do anything they believe is unethical.

 

 Update: Pot Unable to Call the Kettle Black...

David Cameron failed to challenge the Prime Minister of Hungary over his country's draconian press laws.


Link Here 10th October 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor
David Cameron Victor Orban, the Hungarian Prime Minister, has been condemned by world leaders for introducing the most terrifying press laws since the Cold War . But not a mention by David Cameron

The prime minister's failure to confront Orban is the first evidence of warnings by William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, that introducing statutory regulation in Britain will undermine Britain's ability to promote free speech.

Cameron and his government are now at loggerheads with the British newspapers over plans to impose a press censorship regime.

Earlier this week Maria Miller, the Culture Secretary, rejected proposals by newspapers to establish a system of self-regulation backed by fines of up to £ 1million for those who breach the code.

Index on Censorship, which campaigns for greater press freedom, described Cameron's failure to confront Mr Orban as a great shame . A spokesman said:

They have introduced some of the most terrifying press and media ownership laws since the Cold War. It is really at the front line of censorship in Europe at the moment. It seems a great shame that the Prime Minister would not even raise this.

 

 Update: Introducing the State's Right to Impose an Unfair Trial...

All parties agree on rules for Britain's news censor


Link Here 12th October 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor
maria miller Maria Miller, the Culture Secretary, has announced that the main political parties had agreed rules for the new news censor who will police journalists' conduct and deal with complaints.

MPs have proposed a system underpinned by statute, compelling newspapers to submit to the new regime. Those that refuse to participate would face deliberately unfair trials in the event of libel cases.

The latest plan was drawn up in talks between Miller for the Conservatives, Harriet Harman for Labour and Lord Wallace of Tankerness for the Liberal Democrats. It is expected to be approved by the Privy Council on Oct 30.

Following criticism from the industry, politicians agreed that people filing complaints against newspapers could face a fee under the new regulatory regime, to deter speculative or frivolous claims. They also agreed that editors could be involved in drawing up a new code of conduct for the press, which would be approved by the news censor.

Offsite Comment: The secret state is just itching to gag the press

12th October 2013. See  article from  theguardian.com . By Jonathan Freedland

Get regulation wrong, and it won't be tales of Cheryl Cole that are censored, but revelations like those of Edward Snowden

 

 Offsite Article: Vengeful MPs, their Monty Python press charter...


Link Here 13th October 2013  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor
the spectator logo A lethal threat to free speech. By Fraser Nelson, editor of The Spectator

See article from dailymail.co.uk

 

 Update: Celebrity Endorsement...

Hacked Off rounds up 200 celebrities to feature in an advert pushing for press censorship


Link Here 18th March 2014  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor
hacked off logo More than 200 celebritiies, from JK Rowling to Rowan Williams, feature in Hacked Off ad supporting the press censorship system rejected by publishers.

More than 200 leading figures from the arts and academia, including writers, film-makers, actors, comics and broadcasters, have signed a declaration of support for a system of press censorship underpinned by royal charter.

They include Danny Boyle, Michael Palin, Sir Tom Stoppard, Sir David Attenborough, Sir Alan Ayckbourn, Alan Bennett, Dame AS Byatt, Irvine Welsh, Bob Geldof, Ian McEwan, John Cleese, VS Naipaul, Sir Ranulph Fiennes and the former archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams.

Their names appear in full-page advertisements published in three national titles. The declaration, and the assembling of the names, has been organised by Hacked Off.

But the royal charter has been rejected by the overwhelming majority of newspaper and magazine publishers, who are on the verge of creating a new regulator, the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso). Its founders have said they will not seek recognition under the royal charter, which they regard as state restriction on press freedom .

 

 Update: Chief newspaper censor...

Independent Press Standards Organisation appoints CEO


Link Here 31st July 2014  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor
IPSO The new press censor IPSO - the Independent Press Standards Organisation - has appointed Matt Tee as its first chief executive. Tee said:

I am excited to be appointed to be Chief Executive of IPSO.

A free press is a cornerstone of our democracy. To be effective and credible, IPSO must be independent and free from the control of the press or the state.

It will understand the press but be tough when there is wrongdoing.

Tee is currently chief operating officer of the NHS Confederation, before that, he was Permanent Secretary Government Communication.

IPSO is due to start work in the autumn, replacing the Press Complaints Commission. It says that more than 90 per cent of the UK's national press and the majority of regional press and major magazine publishers have already elected to be subject to its regulation.

 

 Offsite Article: Hopefully the UK's free press will be maintained...


Link Here 23rd December 2016  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor
karen bradley Karen Bradley appears to play down likelihood of invoking disgraceful new law designed to force news papers to accept press censorship or else face deliberately unjust court decisions in libel cases

See article from theguardian.com

 

 Offsite Article: Disgracing Britain...


Link Here 4th January 2017  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor
Telegraph logo If another country had a press law like Section 40, Britain would condemn it for persecuting journalists. By Rachael Jolley

See article from telegraph.co.uk

 

 Offsite Petition: Say No to section 40 and Leveson Part 2...


Link Here 5th January 2017  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor
freethepress logo The British government has opened up a public consultation about implementing Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013. Let the government know what you think about this disgraceful press censorship law

See article from freethepress.co.uk

 

 Offsite Article: All the stories you'd have missed if Section 40 had applied...


Link Here 7th January 2017  full story: UK News Censor...UK proposes state controlled news censor
coventry telegraph logo The local press does its bit in the campaign against the shameful Section 40 newspaper censorship

See article from coventrytelegraph.net

 


Censor Watch logo
censorwatch.co.uk
 

Top

Home

Links
 

Censorship News Latest

Daily UK Ratings from the BBFC

Melon Farmers