Press Barons Victimhood Fail

It’s now almost three years since Lord Justice Leveson delivered his report and his recommendations, and in commemoration, the larger part of the Fourth Estate that would rather be allowed to screw over the public as they have done for decades has belatedly realised that they might be in trouble come next month. That is because provisions in a recent Crime and Courts act come into force then.

So the Free Speech Network, that bastion of defending the right of the press to tell the little people, who don’t have the money to sue them, to take their complaints and shove them, and which is paid for by the press to defend its interests, has told “News publishers this morning backed a fightback against ‘Leveson’s toxic legacy’ and legislation that will next month give the UK ‘probably the harshest press regime anywhere in the free world”.

Note the Carlsberg-style “probably”. So what’s the problem? “From 3 November, under the Crime and Courts Act, judges will have the power to impose exemplary damages on publishers who are not members of a Royal Charter-backed press regulator. A second part of the Crime and Courts Act is set to come into force once a press regulator has official approval from the state-funded and Royal Charter-backed Press Recognition Panel”.

But why, given the Act’s provisions have been known about for years, is the press getting itself in a froth now? Ah well. “This could happen before the end of the year, with prospective regulator Impress expected to apply for recognition imminently, and it will mean publishers which are not part of this regulator could pay both sides' costs in libel and privacy cases”. Yes, press people, but you are not giving us the full story.

If someone complains to the press about their coverage, and says - not unreasonably - that they would like to settle the matter via a low-cost arbitration service, only to be told by the press that they won’t play, and the complainant can sue them if they think they’re hard enough (bit like the situation now), they force that person to risk losing a six-figure sum pursuing the case. Hence paying both sides’ costs.

If the press behaves reasonably, and uses the arbitration service, all is well and if the complainant then goes to law, it’s the same situation as now. So what the press is really saying is that it wants to be as downright bloody unreasonable as possible - and that if it is not allowed so to be, it will play the victim and tell anyone daft enough to believe them that the UK has become like Zimbabwe, or even North Korea.

So when the press and its useful idiots tell you about “Leveson’s toxic legacy”, what they really mean is something intended to give ordinary people redress for bad press behaviour, and restore public confidence in that press. That the larger part of the press doesn’t want that to happen tells you all you need to know about where they’re coming from. They couldn’t give a crap about the victims of their bad behaviour.

The free and fearless UK press, folks: prepared to spend serious money, and deploy any old propaganda, so it can carry on pissing on the public. Don’t believe the spin.