The Press Gazette [Journalism Today] publish, online, a Daily Newsletter. This shows articles of interest to journalists. I am not connected to the publishing industry in any way, apart from having had two books "self-published". However I do find that many of the items in the Daily Newsletter are very interesting and comment is invited on them. On 21st January 2010 there was an article by Mr Oliver Luft about press regulation, I submitted a comment on the article and, as I have previously posted blogs about the Press Complaints Commission I have reproduced this comment below.
In discussing the regulation of the newspaper industry it is essential that the exact meaning of the word "Independent" is made clear, not the least aspect being where the money comes from that funds an independent body. It should also be crystal clear as to who is conducting a survey and for who is it being conducted.
In considering the words " ----- a self-regulatory body independent of the newspaper industry ----- " I would argue that the English language is being strained by the use of the words "self" and "independent". Surely it is impossible to be "self-regulatory" and "independent" at the same time. The part sentence should read either " ----- a self-regulatory body for the newspaper industry ----- " or " ----- a regulatory body independent of the newspaper industry ----- ".
The mind is also strained when the independent self-regulatory body has to observe a Code of Practice formulated only by members of the industry that is being regulated. It is being
similarly strained when the self- regulating body is funded by the industry that it is self-regulating. If my memory serves me correctly no less a person than our Prime Minister
Mr Gordon Brown, when referring to MP's expenses said words similar in meaning to "Self- regulation does not work".
Surprisingly, in spite of what I have written above, I think the self- regulation of the newspaper industry by the PCC could be conducted more effectively providing;
They had power.
They had teeth.
They were prepared to use their teeth.
That they were, voluntarily, subject to the "Freedom of Information Act".
That they, voluntarily, subjected themselves to an Ombudsman.
I have written seven blogs regarding the PCC, these can be seen via
http://blrcfwg.blogspot.com Party Free Politics also feature.
Yours sincerely
Frederick W Gilling
Thursday 21 January 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)