Author Topic: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.  (Read 2021 times)

lankou

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2861
Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« on: 01 Dec 2012 09:51AM »
Personally I think it is vital to sign this petition. It may have got next to no publicity but Leveson has made it clear than any new body overseeing the press MUST accept and do something about compaints abouts lies about groups of people as well as the current situation of only one.

The petition:- http://hackinginquiry.org/petition

How a fully implemented Leveson would effect us:-

http://blacktrianglecampaign.org/2012/11/30/the-leveson-report-excellent-news-for-disabled-people-if-cameron-and-the-loony-right-dont-smother-it-post-partum/

NeuralgicNeurotic

  • Charter Member and Volunteer
  • Super Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7373
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #1 on: 01 Dec 2012 10:51AM »
Signed >thumbsup<

Not sure I can share Black Triangle's optimism re. named groups. While realising it's a slightly different issue, I've just spent a dispiriting couple of days reading through the minutes of Stormont's Ad Hoc Committee on Conformity with Equality Requirements, Welfare Reform Bill, as the DSD, ably assisted by their villainous counterparts at Westminster, prepare to slime their way around Section 75.

Where someone in power wants to avoid inconvenient legislation, they'll do it.  :-(

Sorry for going off at a tangent. It's just bloody depressing, that's all.

DarthVector

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1164
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #2 on: 01 Dec 2012 11:07AM »
The Black Triangle link (thanks, lankou) is good if you want to know what Lord Leveson said about disabled people in particular. Scroll down past the Black Triangle content at the start and you'll find a series of quotes from the Leveson Report with emphasis and explanations from Black Triangle. Nice if you want to avoid slogging through the full 2000 page, 4 telephone directory doorstop.

As far as I'm concerned, Lord Leveson's recommendations are the absolute bare minimum required, except for the fact that he's left a horrendous hole where publishers are not compelled to submit themselves to the new regulator. There are already publishers who refuse to submit even to the completely toothless Press Complaints Commission.

Although Lord Leveson's proposed system would give publishers an incentive to sign up by reducing their potential legal costs in the event of a complaint, I'm quite sure some publishers would factor the risk of legal cases into their costs of doing business and refuse to join up. That would let them continue with the status quo of only having to deal with being sued by the very few people who have the money to bring defamation cases. Ordinary people who were mistreated by those publishers would still be frozen out, just as they are now.

My submission to the Leveson Inquiry asked for a considerably stricter regulatory system structured by analogy to the Financial Services Authority and the Financial Ombudsman Service. Needless to say, I'm utterly disgusted by David Cameron's attempts to water down the barely adequate Leveson recommendations before the ink had even dried on the report.

lankou

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2861
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #3 on: 01 Dec 2012 11:13AM »
Scroll down past the Black Triangle content at the start and you'll find a series of quotes from the Leveson Report with emphasis and explanations from Black Triangle. Nice if you want to avoid slogging through the full 2000 page, 4 telephone directory doorstop.


That was why I posted the link.

oldtone27

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2766
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #4 on: 01 Dec 2012 11:24AM »
I have not read the Leveson enquiry, only potted reports, but I suspect he may have stopped short of insisting that all journals sign up to the commission because of the difficulty of identifying 'all journals'.

No doubt the Daily Heil and Daily Excess qualify but what about the parish magazine, or even the school news paper. How far does 'the press' extend? I presume there would be some sort of charge or is it to paid for by the tax payer, or funded out of fines which might skew its decisions.

Implementing it is quite complex so I can see why there is no easy solution even though the principle is straightforward.

lankou

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2861
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #5 on: 01 Dec 2012 11:26AM »
I have not read the Leveson enquiry, only potted reports, but I suspect he may have stopped short of insisting that all journals sign up to the commission because of the difficulty of identifying 'all journals'.


I would have thought it simple, any newpaper or magazine that has an editorial comment.

oldtone27

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2766
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #6 on: 01 Dec 2012 11:53AM »
So that would include my examples. Maybe its necessary but is it practical, or perhaps overkill. I am not sure and I suspect there would be a wide range of views which is why it may not be simple.

DarthVector

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1164
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #7 on: 01 Dec 2012 01:07PM »
Perhaps:

1. any publication can be "called in" by the regulator in the event of a complaint, with a case fee being levied if the publication is found to be at fault; but

2. only media companies have to pay annual subscriptions to the regulator?

I'd consider anything made available for public viewing as a publication, so that would include blogs, forum posts, leaflets, posters, adverts, newsletters, social media, the works.

Private communications to family members and other real-life acquaintances would be exempt from regulation, so password-protected friends-only communication by social media would be fine, but there would be no option to hide behind a claim of "private communication" to your 20,000 Facebook "friends". "Accidentally" publishing a communication that was "intended to be private" wouldn't be an excuse, either.

Note that people would still have to comply with the law in their private communications, so they could still be sued for libel or charged with conspiring to commit a crime, for example.

Companies which only host their users' publications (such as web hosts or Facebook) would not pay annual subscriptions to the regulator, and their obligations would be limited to:

1. taking down material that was clearly unacceptable when notified;

2. taking down material found unacceptable by the regulator; and

3. supplying contact details for the publishing user to the regulator so that they can be pursued for the case fee and the remedies prescribed by the regulator. If the user has supplied false details, the hosting company has to show reasonable efforts to prevent that, or become liable for the fees and remedies.

Over to you; let the flak barrage commence :)

oldtone27

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2766
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #8 on: 01 Dec 2012 01:16PM »
Of course the big problem with the Internet is sites hosted overseas. Somebody was on radio this morning pointing out that you have much greater freedom to post in America because of the 'free speech' provisions in their constitution.

In the end the situation may arise that people will have accept that someone can say anything they like about someone else and there is little they will be able do about it. I am not saying that is a good situation but it may be inevitable. Either that or severe restriction on what can be accessed.

lankou

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2861
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #9 on: 01 Dec 2012 01:18PM »
perhaps overkill.

In the case of the Daily Mail, overkill works for me.

DarthVector

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1164
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #10 on: 01 Dec 2012 01:44PM »
Of course the big problem with the Internet is sites hosted overseas. Somebody was on radio this morning pointing out that you have much greater freedom to post in America because of the 'free speech' provisions in their constitution.

In the end the situation may arise that people will have accept that someone can say anything they like about someone else and there is little they will be able do about it. I am not saying that is a good situation but it may be inevitable. Either that or severe restriction on what can be accessed.

Good points, and I can't see a complete solution either.

That said, many of the big Internet companies have UK subsidiaries, and most countries have laws against defamation. If the person making the post was the one who had to answer to the regulator, and the company could dodge any bullets with a simple takedown and supplying the publishing user's contact details, they might go for it.

What happened next would depend on where the user turned out to be. Although non-UK users would be out of the regulator's jurisdiction, UK users could be held to account, which would at least be a partial solution.

I wouldn't be in favour of access restrictions, since that would be equivalent to pre-emptive censorship, which I don't agree with. I prefer a system where the publisher should try to contact the subject of a story prior to publication - so that the subject can deny allegations or request privacy measures, for example - but where the publisher can still publish if they think that there's a true public interest.

oldtone27

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2766
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #11 on: 01 Dec 2012 02:22PM »
A further interesting point this morning was that in America Internet providers have similar protection to telecom companies in that they are not responsible for what is said on their services, they are merely providers of transmission, not publishers.

Apparently Google for instance does not have any UK servers because our libel laws are vague and they do not want to risk expensive litigation. Other providers are similarly circumspect. Too draconian measures may reduce the availability of provision in the UK.

This may be off the main point of the press but the press will be less involved with paper publishing in future and more online in my opinion.

lankou

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2861
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #12 on: 01 Dec 2012 02:27PM »
A further interesting point this morning was that in America Internet providers have similar protection to telecom companies in that they are not responsible for what is said on their services, they are merely providers of transmission, not publishers.


The Post Office Telegraphy act covers anything transmitted via the telephone network in Britain no matter where it originated from.

oldtone27

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2766
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #13 on: 01 Dec 2012 02:38PM »
Quote
The Post Office Telegraphy act covers anything transmitted via the telephone network in Britain no matter where it originated from.

As far as I am aware this does not extend to Internet providers.

lankou

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2861
Re: Hacked Off, Implement Leveson In Full petition.
« Reply #14 on: 01 Dec 2012 02:55PM »


As far as I am aware this does not extend to Internet providers.

It does if when to comes to personal harrassment and putting up content about you without your permission.