Levison Published tomorrow - waste of time and effort?

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by slipperman, Nov 28, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. So, ahead of Levison publishing his report and recommendations tomorrow, what do fellow ARRSErs think of the whole process? Apart from giving precious luvvies such as Hugh Grant and Steve Coogan the opportunity to spout sanctimonious crap all over the airwaves (already started!), will it actually achieve anything or is it likely to prove to be a spectacular waste of money?
    I really do hope our esteemed leaders will not knee-jerk as a result of the report and pray we don't end up with a fettered press in a Pravda style. True, some of the less desirable journalistic practices need to be sorted out so they cannot happen again, but love it or hate it, our press is currently free and I personally don't want it controlled by Westminster. Those cnuts control enough already and make a regular habit of fcuking it up. My own hope is for a gentle nudging of the tillers in respect of press regulation and not major reform. Interesting days ahead.
     
  2. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    I am instantly suspicious of anyone who thinks that press censorship is a good idea. Given that those in favour now appear to be a combination of Politicians, 'celebrities' and the left-wing, then I'm pretty sure that my suspicions are justified.

    It's going to be a waste of time anyway, given the international nature of news distribution - see this interesting take on it by the chap who runs the Order-Order" blog:
    Paul Staines: Bring On the Press Police - WSJ.com

    Extract:
    "Governments' inability to restrict their citizens' access to online information is, as they say in Silicon Valley, a feature, not a bug. If press regulation becomes law in Britain, there will be a regulated sector and an unregulated sector. The latter will prosper as privacy restrictions inhibit the regulated media from covering more and more stories. The readers will go where the news is and the advertisers and the money will follow the readers. The regulators, however, will not be able to cross borders. So bring it on. Heavily regulate the British media with draconian privacy laws and politically correct "media standards." The readers will come to us, the unregulated, offshore and online free press."
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. I'm not for censorship, but the ***** need to be accountable, and held to account by a watchdog with teeth. Murdoch and his ilk should not be allowed to publish whatever they like, or gain information from wherever they like with impunity.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Remind me again who benefits most from a regulated press.

    A) Ordinary people

    B) crooked politicians and other guttersnipes with things to hide.
     
  5. The press have not been very successful at the first two.
    But purient muck raking yeah we will do that and bleat when caught about freedom.

    Ordiary people dont make headlines at levison and dont really want to take on the media plus celebs sell newspapers.
     
  6. Note also that the government has scheduled the discussion of the Police pension (over 100,000 votes raised to force the issue) for today when Levison is released. How many of the self serving hogs will be in to discuss this or did they just use the 'good day to bury bad news' rule as prescribed by spin doctor one-oh-one?
     
  7. I think the point is that the press have never been completely unfettered, just that they were in charge of policing themselves and their own code of conduct via the PCC, which they were able to completely ignore with impunity.

    Having what amounts to the same code of conduct but run by a third party who can compel them to comply is hardly an attack on democracy.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. The press took the piss massively and seem to be bleating they got caught.
    Doing dodgy stuff to get a massive story in the public intrest possibly acceptable
    Widespread dodgyness just because you can not really acceptable.
     
  9. If there is only 'human interest' rather than actual criminal activity the I believe that a newspaper has no right to 'bug' people, hack their computers or their phones. If the paper is doing so to expose massive fraud or other illegal activity then fair enough as long as their doing so does not hamper or prevent criminal proceedings.

    Where there are corrupt practices within the newspaper then that is not a matter of censorship but one of law. If reporters are bunging money to coppers to get the SP on a crime then they and the coppers concerned should go to prison.

    In my opinion the press is fine as it is although far too much time is spent on worrying what insignificant 'slebs' may or may not be doing. Anyone with even half an education has far more important things to worry about than what some Manchester Argyll player may or may not be up to with this or that bimbo or bimbette.