Newspaper Regulation

Task One: Media Magazine article and questions

Read the Media Magazine article: From Local Press to National Regulator in MM56 (p55). You'll find the article in our Media Magazine archive here. Once you've read the article, answer the following 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?

130 journalists; Perch thinks it'll get expensive and have a very small circulation.

2) How does Perch view the phone hacking scandal?

He thinks the biggest issue is the fact something massively illegal was going on behind the scenes when it should not have happened in the first place.

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

Independent Press Standards Organisation - they're one of the bodies responsible for regulating newspapers.

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

He believes regulators shouldn't exist and that newspapers should regulate themselves based on the law and readership

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?

Somewhat. I don't think broadcasts news needs a huge reduction in regulation, but I think there should be some changes in places.

Task Two: Newspaper regulation exam question

Write an answer on your blog answering the following exam question:

What are the arguments for and against statutory regulation of the newspaper industry? [20 marks]

- There are multiple arguments for and against statutory regulation of the newspaper industry
- A few factors had built up to this, and it's why it's been a discussion in recent years

P1: For regulation

- There are multiple arguments on why statutory regulation needs to happen
- For instance, there were concerns over the public's privacy with the phone hacking scandals
- Following the Leveson Inquiry and the investigation of the murder of Milly Dowler, it was discovered that News of the World was phone hacking a lot of people, for years
- It put into perspective on how much newspapers could really get away with; another issue that relates to this is the fact that newspapers weren't ever properly held accountable for their actions either
- The old regulating body, the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) was run by newspaper owners/editors themselves, so there was a lot of bias to deal with + some newspapers not taking responsibility for their actions

P2: Against regulation

- There are also multiple arguments as to why regulation shouldn't happen
- The biggest one would be the loss of free speech; if the government were to regulate the press instead of independent organisations, then there wouldn't be free speech
- This is the main reason why IPSO exists in spite of the Leveson Inquiry; it aims to still provide free speech to the press.
- Not only that, but the press would be more susceptible to changes made by the government
- Following this, there would be multiple issues with the government regulating the press

Personally, I feel the newspapers should have government regulation, for the sole reason that they've gotten away with too many things. Newspapers don't properly take accountability, and the implementation of IPSO has shown that things haven't changed massively since the Leveson Inquiry.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Magazine Practical LR

Assessment 1 LR

Industries - Ownership + Control