• Sweden edition
 
The comments below have not been moderated in advance and are not produced by The Local unless clearly stated.
Readers are responsible for the content of their own comments. Comments that breach our terms and conditions will be removed.
  Reply to this topic

"Moderators" for the British press?

Is this the beginning of "1984"

Gamla Hälsingebock
post 29.Nov.2012, 05:18 PM
Post #1
Joined: 21.Dec.2006

We all know the "press" is slanted...But do we need someone to choose which "slant "they" like?

Will "moderators" be rotated to assure every "slant" gets a fair deal?

Who chooses the "moderators"?

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/28/business/uk-...port/?hpt=hp_t1
Go to the top of the page
+
skogsbo
post 29.Nov.2012, 05:43 PM
Post #2
Joined: 20.Sep.2011

if you look at what UK press did, whose phones were hacked etc. it was pretty appalling, some editors need some jail time.
Go to the top of the page
+
Gamla Hälsingebock
post 29.Nov.2012, 11:53 PM
Post #3
Joined: 21.Dec.2006

Yes, agreed!

Laws broken, should be enforced.

What I meant was the printed content should not be "moderated".
Go to the top of the page
+
Rick Methven
post 30.Nov.2012, 10:02 AM
Post #4
Location: Linköping
Joined: 30.Nov.2005

It is not a matter of printed matter be 'moderated' but the printed media being held responsible for what they print and for breaches of the law they do in the methods they employ when getting their scoops. The Levinson report stresses the need for an independent press, free from government interference or control. Self regulation has proved not to work as the owners/editors would never give themselves a slap on the wrist. Under the old rules, only the very rich could ever afford to employ the best lawyers to fight their case in court against the top legal sharks employed by the press especially the Murdoch press.

What the press are afraid of is the proposal that a new independent body would have the power to impose fines of up to £1 million and to force newspapers to publish apologies for anything they have been found guilty of on the front page rather than the usual habit of bottom of page 30 in small print.

The press want it to be business as usual with self regulation and a friendly club where they set the rules. or as some one said yesterday, "Another drink in the last chance saloon".

David Cameron takes the very naive view that the whole hacking affair and the ongoing criminal investigations, will be sufficient to ensure the tabloid press behave in a responsible manner. A leopard never changes its spots and a chastised and responsible press will last as long as a scoop is needed to bolster circulation. Then it will 'publish and be damned' once again without any real consequences for the damage they would face for publishing lies.

TV and radio are under the watch of Ofcom who have fines and other sanctions they can impose on companies that is backed by the law. Why should the press be free to do or say anything they want with impunity backed by an army of highly paid legal sharks?
Go to the top of the page
+
byke
post 30.Nov.2012, 10:21 AM
Post #5
Location: Europe
Joined: 28.Oct.2008

The responsibility of the press is becoming ever more important.
17 odd years ago, the collaboration between the press and what was dubbed as "new labour" helped a certain political organisation seize power. In later years the same press collaboration helped "conservatives" seize power.

This shows just how important the press and its owners are.
But more importantly how news groups can use there "freedoms" in an almost fraudulent ways in collaboration to pervert society.

I think the Cameron/Brooks relationship is a lot murkier than reported.
In fact I would go as far to say that the Conservative party wised up to the previous Murdoch/NewLabour deal - And instead of looking to close down or expose, decided to compete in the bidding wars instead. Resulting in an ever heavier mortgage to pay for the latest party in power, but paid for by the nation (without their knowledge).

There does need to be reforms in regards to the UK press to ensure some sort of independence.
But how this would be achieved seems slightly ironic, considering that a man implicated in such collaborations is to oversee such changes.
Go to the top of the page
+
Mo
post 30.Nov.2012, 11:59 AM
Post #6
Location: Stockholm
Joined: 30.Nov.2005

Maybe what the UK should do is offer all the press a 30% subsidy - then they would be much more careful about offending the govt.
Go to the top of the page
+
William Sachsen-Coburg-Go...
post 30.Nov.2012, 01:14 PM
Post #7
Joined: 16.Apr.2010

I think they need to look at funding of libel cases. Currently there is no legal aid and costs are astronomical. Nobody but the very, very rich can bring a case, even when it's blatant lies, and the press know this so print what they like.
Go to the top of the page
+
Pursuivant
post 30.Nov.2012, 02:12 PM
Post #8
Joined: 12.Aug.2008

Levinson is totally out of touch with the modern world. He's more concerned kids will see prince harry's prince albert on a newsstand rather than in the internet. Like really, how many kids pay attention to newsstands? And where do the rest 99% go off to?
Go to the top of the page
+
Yorkshireman
post 30.Nov.2012, 02:56 PM
Post #9
Joined: 22.Nov.2011

My G*d ohmy.gif sounds very very cruel to actually force someone as a job to read the British Press!!

QUOTE (William Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha @ 30.Nov.2012, 01:14 PM) *
I think they need to look at funding of libel cases. Currently there is no legal aid and costs are astronomical. Nobody but the very, very rich can bring a case, even when it& ... (show full quote)

And sooner or later the British Press will learn the Swedish secret to avoiding libel ... Turn everything into a question eg. "Is Prince Harry Gay?" ...you haven't said he is, just asking a question with possible supporting data ...can't be sued for asking a question wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
+
Rick Methven
post 30.Nov.2012, 03:06 PM
Post #10
Location: Linköping
Joined: 30.Nov.2005

QUOTE (William Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha @ 30.Nov.2012, 01:14 PM) *
I think they need to look at funding of libel cases. Currently there is no legal aid and costs are astronomical. Nobody but the very, very rich can bring a case, even when it& ... (show full quote)

The situation that allows only the very rich to sue the papers is why an independent body with powers to fine the press up to £1 million is needed. Cameron is waiting to see what measures the press propose to reign in the excesses of the tabloids. What we can expect is a lot of weasel wording saying we are sorry and we will behave in future, until the next time. The only way to make sure they do behave is to penalize them where it hurts, IN THEIR POCKETS.

two of my relatives were at Hillsborough in 1989, one died the other survived to be labeled scum and accused of pissing on the police etc. which has had a lasting effect on him over the past 22 years. When proved that what they published was a pack of lies put in lurid language by the editor McKenzie all he said was "sorry". They published the story without checking because they knew it would result in increased circulation and they also knew that the maligned Liverpool supporters would never be able to afford to take them to court. The British tabloids have a publish and be damned approach, which has ruined too many lives. That is why the new press watchdog needs teeth in the form of financial penalties.

Nothing will ever get the Sun's circulation back in Liverpool though, Most people will not even use it to wipe their arse.
Go to the top of the page
+

Reply to this topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

751
jobs available
Swedish Down Town Consulting & Productions
Swedish Down Town Consulting & Productions is an innovative business company which provides valuable assistance with the Swedish Authorities, Swedish language practice and general communications. Call 073-100 47 81 or visit:
www.swedishdowntown.com