Support Leveson - sign this

[EXC]

Don't allow our Prime Minister - David 'LOL' Cameron - to support his criminal pals in the press by refusing to implement the Leveson report in full.

Please sign the Hacked Off petition http://hackinginquiry.org/petition/

[teaboy2]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

Exe by supporting it we'd have had no expenses scandals or anything else as the government would control the press and dictators in other countries would too. We already have relevant laws in place to protect people and their privacy. Giving up freedom of the press would be like giving up freedom of speech as reporters will be to afraid they will be prosecuted for reoprting what they know or saw!

Just my opinion though.

[enquirer]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

What caught my attention was his assertion that there was no evidence of widespread police corruption or collusion with the press. Interesting phraseology, I thought.

[EXC]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

Exe by supporting it we'd have had no expenses scandals or anything else as the government would control the press and dictators in other countries would too. We already have relevant laws in place to protect people and their privacy. Giving up freedom of the press would be like giving up freedom of speech as reporters will be to afraid they will be prosecuted for reoprting what they know or saw!

Just my opinion though.

You misunderstand.

All the legislation does is to make the rules (which the press themselves set) of the independent regulator (which the press themselves set up) enforceable.

Rules without remedy are no rules at all.

[teaboy2]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

Back by legislation though from what i heard. Which is what am against, as new legislation is not needed!

[EXC]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

What's ''Back by legislation'' ?

[dogtired]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

Agreed the more sensational type must be regulated but without press freedom to criticise the government i think that would be a step back.
i do not think that ensuring there is legislation would affect this freedom of speech ( I hope that makes sense!)

[teaboy2]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

What's ''Back by legislation'' ?

The very legislation leveson himself said the new regulator should be backed by - I don't have details but BBC refer to it http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20559833

[paul123]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

signed and forwarded...........what is the point of setting up inquiry and ignoring the conclusion as you are scared papers might not support you.

[EXC]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

The very legislation leveson himself said the new regulator should be backed by - I don't have details but BBC refer to it http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20559833

The legislation works how I described in post #4.

[teaboy2]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

Yes but once the government has such legislation they are not going to just leave it as it was ment originally, they will amend it for their own goals. Which is why having any kind of legislation that legislates the press is a very bad thing. Once they have their foot in the door, they ain't going to just stop and stand their!

[Celestine]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

This campaign includes "Promote investigative journalism through effective public interest defences."

as well as implementation of the Leveson Enquiry findings.

What point is there in the PCC if they don't have teeth to enforce? I think it's quite clever actually, freedom of the press is still encouraged and promoted but breaches of conduct can be punished properly; which in turn will discourage the press from slipping into gutter journalism. Because an industry that can hack a murdered girl's phone or ruin the life of a private individual through wild accusations is not an industry that has any part in press 'freedom'.

[EXC]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

Yes but once the government has such legislation they are not going to just leave it as it was ment originally, they will amend it for their own goals. Which is why having any kind of legislation that legislates the press is a very bad thing. Once they have their foot in the door, they ain't going to just stop and stand their!

This is entirely speculative and not what history has taught us. In the last 300 years successive Governments have not shown any interest whatsoever in getting their foot anywhere near the door - including the current Government.

As Celestine points out the proposed legislation - below - actually includes a legal obligation on the part of Government to recognise & conserve press freedom, which up until now has only ever been implied. Try finding a reference to that in The Sun.


''72.What would the legislation achieve? Three things. First, it would enshrine, for the first time, a legal duty on the Government to protect the freedom of the press. Second, it would provide an independent process to recognise the new self-regulatory body and reassure the public that the basic requirements of independence and effectiveness were met and continue to be met; in the Report, I recommend that this is done by Ofcom. Third, by recognising the new body, it would validate its standards code and the arbitral system sufficient to justify the benefits in law that would flow to those who subscribed; these could relate to data protection and the approach of the court to various issues concerning acceptable practice, in addition to costs consequences if appropriate alternative dispute resolution is available.''

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk.../0779/0779.pdf

[enaid]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

Signed, for what it's worth I think something had to be done and sooner rather than later. We do need to know facts not fiction from the press, but it should be done by fair means not foul and as was proved at the enquiry very, very foul means were used in some instances. The way things are now, none of us has much privacy really, you have to tell all and sundry most of your business before you can use their services or buy their goods. Much more private info going in to the health service all of which should be protected and that is not always the case. The line has to be drawn somewhere on just how our private information is got hold of and how it is then used.
So I do think that an independent body should be able to enforce apt punishment for breaking the rules and standards that I do believe the press have set themselves.
I for one am sick of regulators giving guide lines and principles with no follow up whatever if they are abused.

[Inca]

Re: Support Leveson - sign this

Signed with pleasure