23 Nov 11 | Leveson Inquiry, Uncategorized
This article was first published in the Guardian
Nothing titillates journalists more than talking about their profession or, should I call it, their trade. The Leveson inquiry has spawned almost daily public discussions about the future of the Press Complaints Commission, freedom of the press and standards. At the last count three parliamentary committees are looking into the issue, listening to academics and former editors opine ad infinitum about “co-regulation”, “enhanced regulation”, “self-regulation” and “statutory regulation”.
Most of the time, however, the people who matter are silent or surly. Present-day tabloid and middle-market editors seem to have convinced themselves that the hacking scandal is a bit of a diversionary tactic by the government, and that, aside from a few technical changes here and there, it will blow over in time. Keep calm and carry on.
An atmosphere of denial permeated the recent Society of Editors conference. On the issue of phone hacking, many simply did not engage, beyond saying that the guilty will be punished and we will all move on. We have moved on … to the Royal Courts of Justice, and it does not make for a pleasant spectacle.
The first two days of victims’ hearings at Leveson have been enervating. From the quiet dignity of Milly Dowler’s parents to the fragile suffering of Mary-Ellen Field – sacked by Elle Macpherson, who wrongly suspected her of feeding the press – those who have suffered at the hands of the phone hackers have illustrated the bullying and the snooping of the hacks.Margaret and Jim Watson saw a child die as a result. Others had gone through breakdowns.
Their heart-rending testimony was somewhat overshadowed by Hugh Grant’s angry exchanges, his accusations against the Mail on Sunday, and the subsequent war of words among the lawyers. The more studied performance of comedian Steve Coogan this afternoon, including damning testimony against Andy Coulson, the prime minister’s former head of communications, was piercingly effective.
All the while Leveson has sat largely in silence, absorbing the magnitude of the task he has taken on. He has to find a way to prevent future criminality; to help create a new body that can regulate and punish quickly and effectively, and come up with guidelines on privacy that leave the private individual in peace but allow the press to expose the hypocritical. He needs to defend free expression and reinforce good investigative journalism that already faces a host of restrictions. He must try not to hasten the economic decline of an industry that is adopting increasingly desperate measures to keep itself afloat.
From everything I’ve seen of Leveson and those advising him, he gets it. Of course, caution is in order. Memories turn to the Hutton inquiry. The sharp questioning from the presiding judge then lulled everyone into a false sense of security. Hutton’s report was a shocker, a whitewash for government that opened the door to the emasculation of the BBC. And Leveson knows his recent history.
Yet those who need him most – the tabloids – are not helping him. By hiding or lashing out against their critics, the editors, proprietors and their legal teams are playing into the hands of the many voices calling for strict controls. Anyone who has sat before a parliamentary committee knows that the default position of MPs and peers is to hit back at the “beasts” in the media.
This is reflected in ministers’ positions. Kenneth Clarke, the justice secretary, told the Society of Editors not to underestimate the “shocking effects” of recent revelations. Later that day, Dominic Grieve, the attorney general, served warning about a government clampdown on contempt of court. He has since acted on his threat.
The PCC, under its new chairman, is looking at its own future. It aims to submit a detailed report to Leveson in the spring. By the nature of its constitution, it depends on the constructive engagement of its members. The more they resist, the more churlish their involvement with Leveson, the worse for the tabloids will be the result.
For a small army of celebrities the demise of the papers they loathe will be a cause for celebration. Yet the narrowing of a media discourse to an elite talking to an elite, through three or four “quality” papers, will ill serve freedom of expression and democracy. It is not too late for the tabloids to get real. Their obduracy is furrowing Leveson’s brow – and narrowing his room for manoeuvre.
John Kampfner is chief executive of Index on Censorship. He’s on twitter @johnkampfner
16 Nov 11 | Leveson Inquiry
The solicitor representing hacking victims attacked Britain’s tabloid press today as he pledged to unmask the “tawdry journalistic trade” at the third hearing of the Leveson Inquiry.
David Sherborne, who is representing 51 core participant victims, gave a powerful and emotional account of how murdered teenager Milly Dowler’s phone was hacked by the News of the World. He called the act one of “cruelty and insensitivity” and said that Dowler’s parents will testify of the euphoria they felt when the deletion of their daughter’s messages meant they thought she was alive.
Sherborne questioned News International’s earlier claims that hacking was limited to one rogue reporter, adding that there was a cover-up at the newspaper over the extent of the practice, and that there was a concerted effort after the event to “conceal the ugly truth from surfacing.”
He said the paper’s former glory has been so “fatally befouled by its cultural dependency on the dark arts”, giving journalism a bad name.
But phone hacking was, Sherbone said, “just one symptom” of a disease afflicting Britain’s tabloid press. He called the red-tops’ treatment of the parents of Madeleine McCann, he little girl who went missing in Portugal in 2007, “a national scandal”. He noted that Kate McCann’s diary that was given to Portuguese police was published by the News of the World and left her feeling, in her husband’s words “mentally raped”.
He also attacked the reporting of the arrest of Christopher Jefferies, the landlord of murdered Bristol woman Joanna Yeates who was later released without charge and cleared of any involvment of any involvement in her death. Reading out a range of damning headlines referencing Jefferies, Sherborne accused the press of a “frenzied campaign to blacken his [Jefferies’] character, a frightening combination of smear, innuendo and complete fiction”,
Sherborne said such stories were printed to “make money, not solve crimes”, and that none of them had a public interest defence. Earlier this year, both the Daily Mirror and the Sun were fined for contempt of court for articles published about a suspect arrested on suspicion of Yeates’ murder.
The Dowler family, Gerry McCann and Jefferies will all give evidence to the Inquiry next week.
Sherborne also made the case for respect to individual privacy, saying it was “as much a mark of a tolerant and mature society as a free and forceful press.” He condemned tabloid culture of kiss-and-tell-stories, citing reporters’ invasions into the lives of JK Rowling, Charlotte Church, Max Mosley, Sheryl Gascoigne and Hugh Grant, all of whom will be giving evidence in the coming weeks.
In a recent development, Sherborne added that the mother of Hugh Grant’s child had received abusive phone calls because the actor had criticised the press. She was allegedly told to “tell Hugh Grant to shut the fuck up”. Sherborne said that last Friday he had to seek an emergency injunction on behalf of a woman who just had the actor’s baby, the real reason for which being the threats she had received.
Sherborne said he was calling for “real change.”
Earlier in the day, the National Union of Journalists’ general secretary Michelle Stanistreet painted a stark picture of journalistic life in the UK, with an omnipotent editor, a slew of relentless pressures, and “brutal” consequences for reporters who did not deliver stories. She said a culture of fear among journalists inhibited them defending fundamental and ethical principles, and that speaking out publicly was “simply not an option” for fear of losing their jobs.
Referring to one of the Inquiry’s key questions raised by Lord Justice Leveson earlier this week, Stanistreet argued that the protection of journalists by way of a trade union could help “guard the guardians” and promote ethical awareness.
Following her, Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger made the case for a stronger Press Complaints Commission that must have the power to intervene, investigate meaningfully and impose significant sanctions. Unimpressed by how the PCC handled phone hacking, Rusbridger argued in favour of a press standards and mediation commission, a “one-stop shop” that is responsive, quick and cheap. He added that the industry needed to establish a public interest defence that could be agreed upon and argued for.
Leveson agreed on the value of a “mechanism being set up that benefits all”, but questioned how to persuade those who do not subscribe to the PCC that it is a sensible approach.
Sherborne, however, vowed that his victims’ evidence will show “how hopelessly inadequate this self-regulatory code is as a means of curbing the excesses of the press.”
While conceding he, his clients and Rusbridger may agree on strengthening the PCC, Sherborne also quoted a client who claimed that leaving the PCC in the hands of newspapers would be tantamount to “handing a police station over to the mafia.”
The Inquiry will continue with evidence from victims on 21 November.
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson.
15 Nov 11 | Leveson Inquiry
The need for a free press is now “as great, if not greater, than it has ever been”, a lawyer for News International said today as the Leveson Inquiry began its second day of hearings.
For Rhodri Davies QC, a key issue is “not why does the press know so much, but why does it know so little”. He stressed that NI supported a model of independent self-regulation, that the PCC could be improved, and that the press is “not above the law.”
Davies also apologised to phone hacking victims, stressing that the practice was “shameful” and “should not have happened”. He added that NI accepts “there was no public interest justification” in hacking.
Regarding the hiring of a private investigator to carry out surveillance on hacking victims’ lawyers and members of the select committee, Davies said “it wasn’t journalism at all and it was unacceptable.”
Davies contested the figure revealed yesterday by Robert Jay QC, counsel to the Inquiry, that 28 NI reporters had been involved in phone hacking. He said that believes the police are the only people who have seen the entire set of Glenn Mulcaire’s notebooks, which contained five corner names — Clive Goodman and other News of the World staff referred to as A, B, C and D — and asked Jay’s figure of 28 be “rechecked”.
He conceded, however, that the 2,266 requests for voicemails cited in the 11,000 pages of notes were “2,226 too many”. Referring to the five reporters, Davies said “five names is five names too many”.
He added that he was not going to give any assurances that phone hacking did not occur “by or for the News of the World after 2007”, but stressed that lessons had been learned from the jailing of Goodman and Mulcaire. He cited the setting up of an internal committee at NI as one of the steps the company was taking to ensure phone hacking did not happen again.
Also speaking this morning was Jonathan Caplan QC on behalf of Associated Newspapers. He too condemned the practice of phone hacking, adding that no journalist at Associated Newspapers has engaged in phone hacking, bribed or bribes police officers.
Caplan also stressed that the PCC could be made more effective but “did not need to be replaced.” The virtue of the current system, he said, is that complaints are generally heard and resolved quickly, free of charge and without the use of lawyers.
He made the case for all newspapers being part of a self-regulatory system, adding that it was “unacceptable” that a newspaper owner should be permitted to opt out of one.
To this, Leveson said he could not see how this would be achieved without a law forcing all newspapers to sign up.
The hearing will continue this afternoon with an opening statement by Northern and Shell, which publishes the Express and Daily Star.
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson.
14 Nov 11 | Leveson Inquiry
The names of 28 News International employees were written in notebooks belonging to private investigator Glenn Mulcaire, the Leveson Inquiry heard today as it began proceedings at London’s high court.
Robert Jay QC, counsel to the inquiry, also revealed that the words ‘Daily Mirror’ had been written in the corner of Mulcaire’s notebook, but a Trinity Mirror spokesman has said the company has “no knowledge of ever using Glenn Mulcaire”. Mulcaire was jailed in 2007 alongisde former News of the World royal editor Clive Goodman for intercepting voicemail messages of members of the Royal family.
11,000 pages of Mulcaire’s notes reveals he received a total of 2,266 requests from the News International, with 2,143 being made by four unnamed journalists. The inquiry was told that a reporter referred to as ‘A’ — and who cannot be named for fear of prejudicing the ongoing criminal investigations — made 1,453 separate requests for information from Mulcaire.
When Mulcaire’s home was raided in 2006, police also seized 690 audio recordings and a record of 586 voicemail messages intended for 64 individuals.
Jay also confirmed that Mulcaire’s notes cited 5,795 names who may be potential victims of phone hacking.
Today’s revelations suggest a culture of phone hacking at News International, Jay said, adding that the scale of Mulcaire’s work suggested that NI must have employed the private investigator full-time.
He asked if there was a “culture of denial, or worse, a cover up” at News International.
He added, “either senior management knew what was going on and therefore condoned illegal activity, or they did not and systems failed.”
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson.
