I recently attended the Media Society’s debate – Phone-hacking: Is it time get tough on the press? – at the London School of Economics (LSE). The speakers were David Aaronavitch (The Times), Charlotte Harris (Mishcon), Paul Staines (Guido Fawkes blog) and Martin Moore (Media Standards Trust). The debate was lively and engaging with each of the speakers exploring a different aspect of the scandal and providing commentary on how their professions have been affected.
The speakers discussed the self-regulation of the British press and whether this could continue in light of the recent revelations. Having worked as a producer at the BBC and a journalist at a range of UK newspapers, David Aaronavitch was able to offer many interesting insights. He explained that practices which could be considered unethical, such as undercover filming, were strictly regulated at the BBC under producer guidelines. In his experience, guidelines within UK newspapers to cover similar practices were much less stringent. This prompted the speaker to ask – Should a form of producer guidelines be in place in the British press?
While many agreed with the need for stricter guidelines, Peter Staines debated the effectiveness of such regulations within the current media landscape. As Peter pointed out, if a story could not be broken via traditional means it would appear online, drawing readers away from newspapers. He drew particular reference to the way in which super-injunctions were broken on Twitter.
All of the speakers agreed that recent developments have given rise to greater questioning of the British press. According to Peter, social media has made the public more aware of tactics used by the press. Peter referred to the Ulrika Jonsson and Sven Goran Eriksson story, which had been acquired through phone-hacking, as ‘the perfect story’. He argued that, in this case, the public were unconcerned with how information had been obtained. He contrasted this reaction to the reaction following the final News of the World allegations when he argued that the public became united in the belief that an outrageous breach of trust had taken place.
While the speakers acknowledged the events are ongoing, the debate provided an excellent insight into the views of some of those closest to the scandal and their views on how the UK media has been and will continue to be affected.
[Image Credit: Gene Hunt]
news, newspapers, privacy