Newspapers: Regulation

Task One: Media Magazine article and questions

1) Keith Perch used to edit the Leicester Mercury. How many staff did it have at its peak and where does Perch see the paper in 10 years' time?

• Keith Perch had 130 journalists by his side.
• Kieth Perch saw the paper, if still in print, as a weekly paper, very expensive and with a low circulation but if online, there will be fewer staff.

2) How does Perch view the phone hacking scandal?

• The fact that the police didn't handle the case well , the newspapers had to intervene thus, according to Perch, the newspapers were caught in the midst of it.

3) What does IPSO stand for and how does it work?

• Independent Press Standards Organisation.
• IPSO works as a complaints union. If a newspaper hasn't dealt with a complaint within 28 days, then the IPSO complaint committee will intervene and see if the Editor’s Code of Practice has been broken.
• If broken the committee demands corrections to the page 

4) What is Perch's view of newspaper ownership?

• Perch believes in freedom of speech.
• He thinks big cooperation shouldn't be forced to abide by a set of rules that could blur the truth of the journalists work in order to please a certain group of society.

5) Do you agree with his view that broadcast news should have less regulation so that TV channels can support particular political parties or people?

• I dont think that broadcast news should have less regulation because then there is lack of moralism within the industry thus meaning the likelihood of the phone hacking scandal would be increased.

Task Two: Newspaper regulation essay

Write an essay on your blog answering the following question:

What are the arguments for and against statutory regulation of the newspaper industry? 

Your answer should be at least 750 words and feature a minimum of five paragraphs.

There are many arguments for and against statutory regulation, however the idea of continuing to let a newspaper company have free reign is controversial and,in my opinion, dangerous.

In terms of reasons for, there needs to be a body protecting society and those vulnerable from the harsh opinions of newspapers. This is because the media has a role as a ‘guardian’ where they are needed to "provide an essential check on all aspects of public life". However as a result of the phone hacking scandal in 2011, there have been many reasons for statutory regulation to occur in newspapers. Such as the basic need for moralist values within this industry, in the case of Millie Dowler, morals were not present at all as they didn't care for the victims of this. As suggested by Hugh Grant, a victim of this, 80-90% of people want regulation amongst newspapers as they feel the journalists don't realise the extent of damage they cause with their biased and money driven opinions. I think that if we live in a democratic society, we should be able to regulate newspapers as that is what society wants.

As a result of society influencing the content of newspapers, it’s clear that many newspapers can include racism, xenophobia, homophobia etc.. within their pages, thus targeting these groups and ostracising them. If regulated these topics can be avoided and removed from the public eye.

However, due to the human right of freedom of speech, some people disagree with the idea of regulation because just like society, journalists should be able to express what they want in print form. Although 80% of people have voted statutory regulation, it has been proven that only 50% of people vote thus suggesting that the statistic is unreliable in terms of its actual validity.

If newspapers are not regulated they could possibly shine a light on all the controversies occurring within the government system. Exposing the injustices causing difficulties for those working in a capitalist society. This suggests the idea of Marxism by Karl Marx as newspapers can, by a significant amount, decrease the power of the ‘ruling elite’. Though this would be sufficient in an ideal world, we live in a world where the press likes to focus on celebrity gossip and their content heavily depends on their political standing , this reinforces the fact that the media can not be trusted as they only focus on the superficial ideals of the news and not the actual important news that affects the majority of individuals in the UK.

In conclusion, I firmly believe that statutory regulation must be obligatory for every newspaper in order to reduce the amount of immoral activities occurring within the industry that is supposed to protect and inform society.