The Power of the Printing Press - 1 Dec 2012

For 200 years, the UK's Newspapers have been unfettered by any legislation particularly aimed at controlling them.  However, this week, the Leveson Report has recommended the excesses of The Press are controlled by legislation.

Journalists have been obtaining stories by hacking phone lines (already illegal), harassing members of the public (already illegal) and even children in schools (massively illegal).  However, harassment can start small, then have degrees beyond which it becomes illegal; and therein lies the justification for journalistic harassment "in the public interest".  That these activities are already illegal when done to excess, underpins the Government's and the Newspapers' argument that no further control of The Press is necessary or even wise.  But how can any organisation with such a flawed operational history justify continuing their practices without the risk of sanctions?

The Press argues that legislative control is a 'toe in the door' for future governments to add further controls over newspapers and what they print - gagging the free press and handing this valuable propaganda tool over to The State.

But what this ignores is that the status quo hands control of The Government over to The Press.  Our present Prime Minister has been humiliated by the exposure of his relationship with senior press executives; and one wonders whether he would have needed to court these people if they did not have such a strong hold on public opinion and could easily turn the nation against the sitting government with a few well-timed snide headlines.

I remember The Sun's headline "If Kinnock wins today, will the last person to leave Briton please turn out the lights".  Kinnock was defeated. The Sun's next headline was "It's the Sun Wot Won It". This is a plain boast that the newspapers control the electorate (and by default, the Government). The Sun claimed the win because of its enormous circulation and its ruthlessly blunt headlines.  Whether Kinnock had a chance of winning the election without The Sun's interference will never be known; but interfere they did - and Kinnock was defeated.  Rupert Murdoch, who has been owner of the paper throughout, said at the Leveson Inquiry that the headline was 'tasteless and wrong'; but it was in line with previous tasteless headlines such as "Gotcha!" when the Argentine ship the General Belgrano was sunk during the Falklands War with thousands of lives lost.

Whether The Press still has such power is a moot point. Other media have invaded their patch - media with the appeal of being immediate and global; that is written and read by people who may never buy or read a newspaper. What is true is that the Press will wield what power remains to them; and to their own political and financial ends.  Indeed, if their circulation figures start failing, there is a big risk of an attempt to boost circulation by 'jumping the shark' as they say in continuing dramas - printing something outrageous, reckless of whether it stands up to scrutiny - to sell more papers.

If there were a legal framework within which The Press were made to operate, the scales would be balanced.  The Press should not be afraid of The Government; but neither should The Government be afraid of capricious attacks from The Press.  The Press should never be permitted to print scaremongering headlines in the lead up to General Elections and, maybe even more importantly, The Press should be forced to think twice before destroying a family or an individual because it would make tomorrow's circulation figures look good.

-end-