 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
dannycheveaux1 Great Old One Joined: 30 Apr 2003 Total posts: 100 Gender: Unknown |
 Posted: 18-03-2013 16:09 Post subject: |
 |
|
|
The threat to the Conservative vote from UKIP is growing and Murdoch recently met up with Farage, probably as a not-so-disguised threat to Cameron that his papers may drop their support for the tories.
Cameron is obviously worried enough to go back on his promises. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| gncxx King-Size Canary
Great Old One Joined: 25 Aug 2001 Total posts: 13303 Location: Eh? Gender: Male |
| Posted: 18-03-2013 20:06 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Full story:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21825823
| Quote: | A deal has been struck between the three main political parties on a new press regulation regime in the wake of the phone-hacking scandal.
An independent regulator will be set up by royal charter with powers to impose million pound fines on, and demand upfront apologies from, publishers.
The prime minister has outlined to MPs the scope of the formal document, which will set out the regulator's powers.
Press reform campaign group Hacked Off has welcomed the deal.
But the major newspapers have yet to respond to the details.
The deal follows Lord Justice Leveson's inquiry into press ethics, which found that journalists had hacked thousands of phones. He called for a new, independent regulator backed by legislation designed to assess whether it is doing its job properly.
David Cameron said the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Labour had agreed on a new system of "tough independent self-regulation that will deliver for victims and meet the principles set out in (Leveson's) report".
He said a new system would ensure:
upfront apologies from the press to victims
fines of 1% of turnover, up to £1m
a self-regulatory body with independent appointments and funding
a robust standards code
a free arbitration service for victims
a speedy complaints system
The charter defines publishers as newspapers, magazines or websites containing news-related material.
But there was confusion over how the plans would extend to the rest of the internet - with one Downing Street aide telling the BBC it would not cover blogs such as Guido Fawkes' political commentary... |
So they sorted something out, though the point about the internet is interesting - how will they regulate the less official sites who can say whatever they want, regardless of accuracy? What happens to truth in reporting in the future when opinion takes precedent? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Zilch5 Vogon Poet
Great Old One Joined: 08 Nov 2007 Total posts: 1463 Location: Western Sydney, Australia Gender: Male |
| Posted: 18-03-2013 22:11 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| A similar initiative here is set to fail as the local politicians fear the Murdoch press too much to stand up to them. Sad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| gncxx King-Size Canary
Great Old One Joined: 25 Aug 2001 Total posts: 13303 Location: Eh? Gender: Male |
| Posted: 24-04-2013 17:43 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Full story:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22278947
| Quote: | Surrey Police's handling of the Milly Dowler murder inquiry has been criticised for failing to check claims the schoolgirl's voicemail was hacked.
A watchdog has accused senior officers of having "collective amnesia" when questioned about why they did not investigate.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission did not discover who decided not to pursue the claims.
Milly, 13, disappeared in March 2002, as she walked home in Surrey.
Surrey Police acknowledged it should have revisited the hacking allegations.
The findings follow an investigation into the conduct of two senior officers, Deputy Chief Constable Craig Denholm and Det Supt Maria Woodall.
'Surprise and dismay'
The IPCC concluded that neither were guilty of misconduct. Surrey Police said it had taken "management action and issued words of advice" to both.
IPCC deputy chair Deborah Glass said: "Phone hacking was a crime and this should have been acted upon, if not in 2002, then later, once the News of the World's widespread use of phone hacking became a matter of public knowledge and concern.
"Our investigation has heard from officers and former officers from Surrey Police who have expressed surprise and dismay that it wasn't investigated.
"We have not been able to uncover any evidence, in documentation or witness statements, of why and by whom that decision was made: former senior officers, in particular, appear to have been afflicted by a form of collective amnesia in relation to the events of 2002.
"This is perhaps not surprising, given the events of 2011 and the public outcry that the hacking of Milly Dowler's phone produced..." |
Yes, why wouldn't the police want to take on the might of the tabloids? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| gncxx King-Size Canary
Great Old One Joined: 25 Aug 2001 Total posts: 13303 Location: Eh? Gender: Male |
| Posted: 24-04-2013 17:47 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Meanwhile:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22278946
| Quote: | The Sun's royal editor has been charged with conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office over allegations he paid for stories about the Royal Family and Sandhurst Military Academy.
Duncan Larcombe was charged along with John Hardy, a colour sergeant at the academy, and his wife Claire Hardy.
An ex-pharmacy assistant at Sandhurst Medical Centre, Tracy Bell, was charged with misconduct in public office.
They will appear before Westminster Magistrates' Court on 8 May...
The charges come after a former police officer was arrested as part of the investigation into alleged illegal payments by journalists to public officials.
The 41-year-old man, who used to be in the Surrey Police force, was arrested at his home in Sussex at 06:00 BST as part of Operation Elveden.
He is being interviewed at a Sussex police station on suspicion of misconduct in public office.
He becomes the 62nd person to be arrested during the investigation.
Operation Elveden is running alongside Operation Weeting, the investigation into allegations of phone hacking, and Operation Tuleta, which is looking at computer hacking and other privacy breaches. |
Just how close were the cops and the journos? Too close, it looks like. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| gncxx King-Size Canary
Great Old One Joined: 25 Aug 2001 Total posts: 13303 Location: Eh? Gender: Male |
| Posted: 25-04-2013 18:45 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Well done, everyone:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22294722
| Quote: | The newspaper industry has rejected a plan for press regulation agreed by the three main political parties in the wake of the Leveson Inquiry.
The newspapers opposed the idea of a regulator backed by a royal charter, and have revealed an alternative plan.
It is closely based on the draft charter agreed after the Leveson report into press standards - but without "state-sponsored regulation".
Campaigners said it showed the industry had "learned nothing" from Leveson.
The Guardian and the Independent are the only two titles out of 11 national newspapers that have not signed up.
The government's royal charter, published on 18 March, has "no support within the press" and has been condemned by media freedom organisations, said a statement released by the Newspaper Society, on behalf of a number of national and local newspapers.
The newspapers also argue that they had no say in the final discussions.
Prime Minister David Cameron said there was all-party agreement around the published charter but he was "always very happy to look at other proposals".
However, BBC political correspondent Norman Smith said government sources are saying their plans "will not be dropped" in favour of the newspaper industry package...
This throws open the post-Leveson debate as politicians cannot force the papers to engage with their plan, our correspondent said.
The risk for politicians is the newspapers' plan could see the press regulating itself once more, under a rulebook it designed - and this is unlikely to appease the public or victims, he said.
The newspapers' proposals are different from the government-backed scheme for England and Wales in that they:
Remove Parliament's power to block or approve future changes to regulation. Instead the regulator, trade bodies and a newly-created "recognition panel" would have to agree to changes
Would see the chair and members of the panel selected by an appointments committee chaired by a retired Supreme Court judge, and include one representative of the industry's interests, one member representing the public interest and one public appointments assessor nominated by the Commissioner for Public Appointments for England and Wales
Remove a ban on former editors sitting on the panel
Give newspaper and magazine readers a say on the industry's proposals
Make it more difficult to bring group complaints
Change the power of the regulator to "direct" the nature, extent and placement of corrections and apologies, saying it should "require", not "direct..."
But campaign group Hacked Off said in a statement: "This desperate move by editors and proprietors… is only the latest proof that most of the industry has learned no lessons from the Leveson experience.
"They are not sorry for the abuses exposed at the inquiry... and they do not accept the need for real change..." |
Brilliant. How many millions was that down the drain? The trouble is, responsible journalists will continue to be responsible, and more power to them, but with one tabloid driving someone to suicide in the last few weeks do the irresponsibles expect us to believe they're on the level?
I notice many quotes from those in the industry who have no intention of changing their game are mentioning the "P" word - they've made politicians such figures of hate over the past decades that when they do try to do something helpful we're expected to oppose it whatever. Any attempt to improve things is supposed to be interference at best, thin end of the wedge nanny state at the worst. Oh well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pietro_Mercurios Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 25-04-2013 19:17 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| No political interference? The Murdoch press, the Barclay brothers, Viscount Rothermere and his muppet, Dacre, etc. Nothing political in their motives. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| gncxx King-Size Canary
Great Old One Joined: 25 Aug 2001 Total posts: 13303 Location: Eh? Gender: Male |
| Posted: 25-04-2013 23:42 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Yup, the hypocrisy is quite something to behold. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ronson8 Things can only get better.
Great Old One Joined: 31 Jul 2001 Total posts: 5970 Location: MK Gender: Male |
| Posted: 25-04-2013 23:55 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| And we the people just let it happen, sad really. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| gncxx King-Size Canary
Great Old One Joined: 25 Aug 2001 Total posts: 13303 Location: Eh? Gender: Male |
| Posted: 09-07-2013 23:00 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Busted:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23239545 (full story)
| Quote: | Rupert Murdoch has said he "welcomes" the chance to face MPs over comments he allegedly made about a police probe into corrupt payments by journalists.
The Commons culture committee wants to question the News Corp boss, who apparently criticised officers and defended reporters in secretly-recorded conversations with staff on The Sun.
Mr Murdoch's spokesman said he wanted to clear up "any misconceptions"...
Mr Murdoch was secretly recorded in March by Channel 4 News and the Exaro news agency appearing to criticise the police and defending his journalists who have been accused of such payments.
It was broadcast appearing to show him criticising Operation Elveden - the probe into alleged illegal payments to public officials by journalists, mainly from News International.
'Protracted'
In the recording - of a talk Mr Murdoch gave to Sun journalists - he is heard complaining about "totally incompetent" police officers and saying he would do "everything in his power to give you total support, even if you're convicted".[/b]
BBC media correspondent David Sillito said the MPs believed there were contradictions between the apparent contents of the recording and Mr Murdoch's evidence to them that they wanted to explore.
But he added that with more than 20 arrests so far in the Elveden inquiry and several people charged, the committee would be extremely restricted in what questions it could ask.
A spokesman for News Corporation said: "Mr Murdoch welcomes the opportunity to return to the select committee and answer their questions. He looks forward to clearing up any misconceptions as soon as possible."
Earlier on Tuesday, Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick told MPs on the Home Affairs Committee that the force was seeking a court order to get hold of the tape recording.
She said voluntary co-operation with News Corp had "significantly reduced" in the past couple of months and all new requests for material were now subject to the approval of a judge - a process she described as "protracted"... |
Nothing really surprising, Murdoch has also said far more incriminating stuff on that tape from what I've read, which makes it all the more imperative we bring these criminals to book. Amusing he was caught out in this way, mind you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pietro_Mercurios Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 10-07-2013 08:03 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| gncxx wrote: | Busted:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23239545 (full story)
...
Nothing really surprising, Murdoch has also said far more incriminating stuff on that tape from what I've read, which makes it all the more imperative we bring these criminals to book. Amusing he was caught out in this way, mind you. |
Ironic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
