It’s not about Free Speech, It’s about Money

The press can blather on about free speech and not wanting their voices to be censored by the state all the want, but the truth is their objections are not based on any moral principles or any high ideals – no. Their objections are based on the fact that if they can’t lie, can’t exaggerate, can’t gossip, spread rumours and so forth – they will lose money. 

And that is it. If they can’t publish stories that they know are untrue, that they can’t prove are true, that are not in the public interest, that invade people’s privacy for no other reason than it is "a good tale" – then they will be forced to write proper news and proper stories, or actually spend money on research instead of making stuff up. 

Either way – if they can’t fill their papers with sex and scandal, they think their circulation will go down and they’ll make less money. 

Trevor Cavanaugh (sp?) was on Radio Four saying that the press should not be regulated by the state, because the government should not be permitted to say what should go in the papers and what shouldn’t. And on one specific part of that point, he is right – it is not the duty of government to censor press.

But then his argument kind of fell apart, because he doesn’t seem to have any grasp of reality, and any morals whatsoever. (He is the ex editor of The Sun, which kind of explains the lack of morals and the complete and utter lack of common sense!)

We have any number of independent regulators in this country. The British Medical Council, for example, regulates the medical people in this country – doctors, nurses and so forth. 

And while it doesn’t stop doctors and nurses from doing bad things, it damn well ensures they are punished when they do do bad things. 

But according to the glorious Mr Cavanaugh, the fact that The BMC exists and bad things still happen is an indication that the press don’t need an independent body (not a government controlled body, but a fully independent one) to regulate them. Because clearly it wouldn’t stop the press doing bad things, so what is thee point of it?

but here’s the thing :- if a reporter wrote a libellous story was forcibly dismissed from whatever paper he wrote for, and was not allowed to ever work for another newspaper again, I am pretty sure the next reporter who considered writing a story like that would at least think twice about it. And if a paper that wrote five libellous stories in a 12 month period was shut down – not just fined, but shut down – then I am sure other papers would also think twice about writing stories.

The free press is one of the best things about this country – it is truly a glorious thing that is worth fighting for. And I would not want to change that.

And I am not asking to. I am not asking for stories about the government to be suppressed through fear and intimidation, and I am not asking for celebrities who do something wrong – something in the public interest – to be protected from exposure.

But we have a free press, and we use it to write stories about footballer’s sex lives. We have a free press and we use it to take pictures of JK Rowling’s CHILDREN in swim suits. We have a free press and we use it to gossip, to spread rumours, to tell tales about people who have more money than us.

It is an insult to every person who has fought and died for a free press – whether in this country or any other – and it is time we put a stop to the press being the only – THE ONLY – agency in this country that has no legal oversight.

Every other agency in this country with the power to hurt someone’s life has a regulator backed up by law. 

Even the TV channels are regulated by law and forced to answer for anything they do wrong – the way the BBC are treated is proof enough of that.

But the press has no one to tell it to behave. No one to punish them when they do wrong. No one to stop them lying. 

Sure – if they libel you, you can go to court. Assuming you have the money to spend to do it of course, otherwise you are just going to have to live with whatever stories they want to spin. 

Cameron already looks like he is going to wimp out over Leveson – he wants "a cross party consensus" , meaning that he wants to spend the next two years talking about it, rather than doing anything about it. And when was the last time the political parties agreed on anything of this magnitude?

If he were a real leader, and not a coward, he would stand up for what is right and act on his own. But, since he in the pockets of The Murdochs and is terrified of the other papers, he is going to do nothing. He set up this inquiry as an attempt to placate the public, and it is clear now that he never actually intended to act on it. It was only ever going ot be a shield to defend him and his buddies in the press from everything they deserve. 

Leveson reports tomorrow, but it will not change anything. The politicians are too afraid of the press, and the press are too afraid of losing money.

And it is not about free speech or state sponsored censorship or a government owning the press.

It’s about money.