MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, May 24th 2022 - 12:01 UTC

 

 

UK new regulating system for the press triggers bitter controversy

Thursday, October 31st 2013 - 20:09 UTC
Full article 33 comments

Britain approved a new system of regulating its press, a move newspapers said was draconian and threatened freedom of speech but which former victims of press excess described as long overdue. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Stevie

    Hahahahaha!!!

    Now I understand why this lot all of the sudden agreed with the decision against Clarín, it all makes perfect sense!!!

    Hahahahahaha!!!

    Oct 31st, 2013 - 08:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    Present it however you wish...the UK Government now control the “Free” Press....

    Oct 31st, 2013 - 08:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Stevie

    This is highly amusing...

    Hey! Lot!

    How come you are more preoccupied with the freedom of press in Argentina and Venezuela than with your own?

    Hahahahaha!!!

    Oct 31st, 2013 - 08:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • HansNiesund

    Not a moment too soon.

    The British press has been getting away with politically biased opposition to Conservative governments for far too long.

    Oct 31st, 2013 - 08:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • golfcronie

    @4
    You obviously have trouble understanding the above article. It stated that all political parties were in favour of the Royal Charter. So exactly how do you come to your conclusion?

    Oct 31st, 2013 - 08:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • HansNiesund

    @5
    Irony

    Oct 31st, 2013 - 09:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Britworker

    Its all about balance and keeping the pendulum in the right place, something we have been doing in Great Britain for a few thousand years.

    When a newspaper hacks a dead child's phone so that her parents are given hope into thinking she is still alive, the line has been crossed and something needs to be done.

    Oct 31st, 2013 - 09:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • reality check

    I think your daughter is dead.

    No, she can't be, she just cleared the inbox on her mobile phone. She is alive!

    Journalists do not need to be held to account?

    You think??????

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 01:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Stevie

    I don't agree rc...
    From my point of view, that would be breaking the law and would be an excellent excuse to prosecute the ones that committed the crime, but still a lame one to remove press freedoms.

    This matter has obviously nothing to do with the recent publications, or intents, of classified material, of course...

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 02:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Casper

    The press have brought this on themselves. Some sectors, at least, with the collusion of parts of the establishment, have demonstrated that they don't understand the responsibilities that come with freedom.

    Mind you, it might be more effective, and far more entertaining, to simply tie up Rupert Murdoch to the stocks and let the victims of 'phone hacking throw tomatoes at him.

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 04:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    @9 Stevie

    The UK press has been given plenty of opportunity to self-regulate. Since the death of Princess Diana in 1997 in fact, given the fact that their constant hounding of the woman was a contributing factor in her death.

    They swore afterwards that they would change, that they would become a more responsible press.

    They didn't. They became worse. Breaking the law. Believing themselves to be above the law, and hiding behind press freedom. That freedom that had been won and maintained by many brave men and women.

    So in the intervening 16 years, the press has done nothing to improve and did instead become worse.

    Yes, the people who hacked the phones are being prosecuted, but the whole system wasn't working.

    The press in the UK thought it could keep on normal jogging, yet the public in the UK were furious with them, and demanded that the politicians do something to curb their excesses.

    The press hold no moral high ground, they don't have public support, and they'd better abide by the Charter, which states that any complaints against their conduct will go to an independent body - not the government.

    So press freedom to do as they please curbed, but freedom of the press still protected.

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 07:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DanyBerger

    Oh! well, well, well

    Now Tyranny in UK officially declared, thanks to the monarch and fascist politicians all together to abolish freedom of press and independent media groups to make critics over the corruption and politician wrong doing in Britain.

    No Royal Navy, No carriers, No Economy, No Jobs, No freedom of press and no hope.

    Banana republic where?

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 08:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    Aw look, DanyBerger is making a fool out of himself again, showing that he doesn't actually understand this situation.

    The press in the UK is a free press. They were given the opportunity to regulate themselves. They didn't do that, and then added onto that, they committed crimes.

    Nothing the press did was in the public interest. You since, Dany, the press thought that 'freedom of the press' meant that they had carte blanche to do as they pleased, to hack people's phones, stalk people, interfer in a murder investigation, and print story's that weren't true.

    Well freedom of the press actually means free from government interference.

    So what we have now is an independent body (that means exactly what it says on the tin) who will review complaints against the press, as they have shown that they are incapable of policing themselves.

    So as you can see, the press is still free, it is just now being held accountable for it's actions.

    All of this they brought upon themselves. They have no public support in the UK.

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 09:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Orbit

    Ah, yes Dany and Stevie, agree with you totally on this on ... The UK have got it all wrong. They have an independent public enquiry, agonise over how to implement the findings in order to gain cross party support, come up with a solution that treats pro and anti government press equally, and then make it optional! What were they thinking !?!

    In Argentina things are done much better; if you are pro-government you are free to do as you please and get government financial support even. If you are pro-government and then fall out with them, my god does the ton of bricks fall on you quickly; you are hounded through every court in the land, have TV schedules re-arranged to distract from your programming, have waves of tax inspectors sent in to harass you, have advertisement blockades designed to hurt you economically... that's how you ensure freedom of press, that's how its done properly!

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 10:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Stevie

    No Orbit.
    Actually, the UK got it all right.
    Because one thing is when Venezuela restricts the freedom of press for having a public channel calling for the people to act undemocratical and revolt against a selected government.
    Or like Argentina, where a media Corporation is the owner of basically all the mediatic sources that are available for the broader audience in the country.

    Because when UK restricts press freedoms it's obviously a necessity.

    When a SA nation does it, it's... dictatorial...

    Orbit, repeat it to yourself until you are convinced.
    Don't bother with us...

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 10:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Orbit

    All societies and governments curb press freedoms in some form. Its how you do it that is the big difference here. Too subtle for you ?

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 10:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Stevie

    No Orbit, the big difference here is WHO curbs press freedoms.

    And the only subtlety here is the fact that the only reason UK is doing what they do, is to be able to stop the intelligence leaks...

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 10:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Orbit

    An optional charter of press regulations born out of an independent public inquiry will stop intelligence leaks? Sure.

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 11:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DanyBerger

    @LEPRecon

    “Aw look, DanyBerger is making a fool out of himself again, showing that he doesn't actually understand this situation.”

    oh! really?

    I think the only one making the fool out of himself is you my friend...

    You where calling Venezuela a dictatorship for doing the same.

    Lets see the Crown Owns BBC that is the monopoly of information in UK, and now have a full control over the free press by applying sanctions over a 1m pounds to the media if they don’t like the news.

    That is virtually censorship and the end of the freedom of press for the independent private media in UK.

    So Cuba and North Korea have more freedom than UK on these days.

    Its is not what we call in Europe a banana republic?

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 11:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    @19 DanyBerger

    Everytime you post you show your ignorance in spades.

    Stop making a fool out of yourself. You obviously don't understand what the Charter actually is, how it's going to be applied OR the fact that it is, in fact, OPTIONAL, and the reviews are done by INDEPENDENT committee.

    Your inability to comprehend these simple things isn't surprising.

    There is no censorship in the UK. There is only the wish of the PEOPLE (you know the people are the most important part of any democracy) for the press to be held accountable for their actions.

    You obviously don't understand freedom of the press. You don't understand democracy AND you don't understand simple concepts.

    It must be so frustrating for you, waiting for your next La Campora care package.

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 11:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Orbit

    “the Crown Owns BBC that is the monopoly of information in UK”.

    Did you actually just type that? Really?

    Must phone reuters, bloomberg, sky, the associated press, channel 4,5, ITV and a few thousand other media outlets and tell them that they can't say anything without the BBC's say so. Perhaps no-one has told them what Dany knows.

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 11:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • HansNiesund

    Dany has difficulty understanding that a government would act against a press which generally supports it.

    Spot the difference with respect to Argentina and Venezuela.

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 12:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Stevie

    As in “you are free to publish what you wish, as long as I agree with what you publish”?
    Didn't they disagree with a Snowden leak that was never published, I remember a Brasileiro involved...

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 12:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    I am agreeing with Stevie on this one, and others.

    Hacking was against the law and should be dealt with accordingly - as it is in the courts this very day - it is not a reason to muzzle the press.

    A free press is essential. It may be ugly at times but free it must be.

    If you don't like what the press is doing DON'T BUY THEIR PAPER! It is that simple but FFS don't take away their freedom.

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 02:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Casper

    The press is still free, they are simply being asked, not compelled, to submit to a much softer form of accountability that just about every industry is obliged to conform to.

    This reform is supported by the public, all the major parties and has now been tested in front of the courts. It's easy to forget when talking about a 'free press' that the 'free press' are mostly business's and are produced primarily to make money, not to inform the public. That's precisely what motivated these hacking attacks. A hook to titillate the public, accumulate market share ( circulation ) and get the advertising money.

    Newspapers are notorious for their reluctance to acknowledge a mistake. It usually takes a lawsuit to make them issue a retraction and how often is that retraction published on the front page? And how long after the initial transgression does the victim typically have to wait before the retraction is issued - weeks, months, even years. And the damage is already done by then.

    The truly sleazy part of the media acted as though they could do whatever they liked. Now they know that the power they have - to subject individuals to the spotlight, irrespective of whether they have any business doing so - can be turned on them too.

    I don't have any problem with that.

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 05:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    24 ElaineB

    This association with SA isn't taking you over to “The Dark Side” is it, agreeing with Stevie!

    Don't worry, NOTHING will change with the UK press, they will still do whatever they like, whether you buy the paper or not, whether there is this “Charter” or not.

    You just wait and see, it was always thus.

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 08:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DanyBerger

    Oh! poor Britons and Britons wannabe!!!!!!

    They want to explain others what democracy looks like when they live still in a middle age kingdom without essential liberties that we enjoy everyday in the west and now this “No freedom for the press to make critics”.

    Lets wait for the “CaMoron Ministry of Truth” and CaMoron National channel “Happy News from UK” perhaps.

    War is peace!
    Freedom is Slavery!
    Ignorance is strength!

    Big Brother is Watching You!

    “Independent thinking and individualism is forbidden”

    The future of Britons and BOTs
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8PLsHxJm9Y

    Sad, really sad...

    And the economy even worse, but who cares if the “CaMoron’s Ministry of Truth” says that all is fine and that the economy never was so good.

    Ah! as I said many times before the only way for Britons to get out of this mess is Heathrow Airport...

    Nov 01st, 2013 - 11:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Casper

    @27 Dany

    You sound deranged.

    Nov 02nd, 2013 - 06:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DanyBerger

    @casper

    What is like to be a second class citizens in your own country?

    Nov 02nd, 2013 - 11:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Casper

    @Dany

    I'm quite content with my status. Thanks for asking.

    Nov 02nd, 2013 - 01:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Orbit

    Don't worry about Dany ... his MO is to type out as much garbage as he can think of in 2 minutes and see if it winds anyone up. Fairly basic attention seeking. And quite dull.

    Nov 03rd, 2013 - 12:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DanyBerger

    Her Majestic Minister of Truth latest news!!!

    Britons are the richer people in the world...

    Britain archived the title of “world's Fastest Growing Economy in 2013”...

    Britain needs more immigrants to occupy jobs vacancies in the industrial sector...

    Britons are the happier people in the world according with HMMoT survey...

    We are watching you!!!!!!!!!

    Nov 03rd, 2013 - 02:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Casper

    @31

    Agreed.

    @32 Dany

    Gleeful idiocy is still idiocy.

    Nov 03rd, 2013 - 12:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!