Three cheers for Lord Justice Leveson; None for The Editors

Raymond Snoddy: ‘The Editors’, both present and former, turned out to be a motley lot with no coherent view, either of the world or media regulation, at the Leveson inquiry this week. But, fear not, help is at hand – bring on the politicians…

Sometimes in the middle of a complex and frustrating inquiry there is an exchange – a comment which is like a light bulb switching on.

It happened this week at the Leveson inquiry when ‘The Editors’ started to show up – but had nothing to do with the rational testimony of Lionel Barber or the flamboyant Kelvin MacKenzie, who hasn’t edited a bus ticket – to adapt one of his more notorious comments – for 20 years.

Chris Blackhurst

The shaft of light was provoked by Chris Blackhurst, editor of The Independent – though not much direct illumination came from him.

Those who pay attention to such matters will remember that on Radio 4’s Media Show last year Blackhurst was asked what he thought of Shadow Culture spokesman Ivan Lewis’s suggestion that all journalists should be licensed and could therefore be struck off for bad behaviour.

Blackhurst thought this was a capital idea, much to the surprise of interviewer Steve Hewlett, who pressed him on the details of how such a scheme would work. And much to the surprise of many listeners, Blackhurst continued digging and the thoroughly bad idea has clearly now lodged permanently in his brain.

So naturally Blackhurst told the Leveson inquiry he thought that any new industry regulator might have the power to ban journalists from practising.

Then came the extraordinary putdown from Lord Leveson. “The state can say who is entitled to practice as a doctor, lawyer, or whatever, but it’s a fundamental of freedom of expression that what you are doing when you are writing something down is you are doing no more than exercising your right to freedom of speech,” said his Lordship.

You were almost tempted to pause for a moment’s reflection on the full impact of what had just been said.

A judge whom many fear might have been put in place by a Prime Minister to limit freedom of expression in this country – by design or default-  has actually got a much firmer grasp on the principles of freedom of expression than the editor of The Independent.

Three cheers for Lord Justice Leveson and it is to be hoped that, suitably chastised, Chris Blackhurst will delete such nonsense from his brain and concentrate in future on keeping a close eye on the activities of Johann Hari.

A new self-regulating body?

Leveson’s session with Barber, most of whose staff in the past wouldn’t have been technically capable enough to pull off phone-hacking even if they had ever thought of such a thing, produced more illumination of a very different kind.

We saw for the first time the clearest indications of, at least the direction, in which Lord Leveson is heading. “There has to be a framework onto which you latch independent regulation, which is absolutely independent of government, and also not necessarily run by editors but perhaps by some very senior retired journalists on it,” said his Lordship.

Yes that sounds promising, except that it also sounds like a very good description of the Press Complaints Commission.

Later Lord Leveson went on to develop his thought by talking of an “arbitral system” attached to the new self-regulating body. That too sounds familiar and remarkably similar to the present – albeit more informal way – the PCC frequently mediates between complainants and editors.

The main problem is the “framework” bit, which Lord Levenson did not elaborate on at this stage. Is it going to be a statutory framework? If so that might compromise his admirable desire for a body that is “absolutely independent” of Government.

The power to impose heavy fines on miscreants advocated by such different editors as MacKenzie and Barber also smacks of at least reserve statutory powers.

The Daily Telegraph

The inquiry also appears to have missed a trick in its dealings with the Daily Telegraph. Leaving aside the horrors of phone-hacking, a couple of investigations by the Daily Telegraph illustrate better than any other the difficulties, dilemmas and subjective judgments involved in any form of press regulation.

The MPs expenses scandal. Great story but £150,000 did go to a middleman for what was undoubtedly stolen information, which was presumably why The Times turned down an earlier offer.

The then Telegraph editor Will Lewis argued to Leveson, however, that as the disc was copied it did not constitute theft.

Most people would say the Daily Telegraph was right to behave as it did because of the overwhelming public interest in what was found.

At the same time there was considerable public interest in discovering that business secretary Vince Cable was prepared to reveal, in his constituency office when talking to under-cover Telegraph reporters, that he had no intention of dealing with News Corp’s bid for all of BSkyB in a fair manner. He was lucky to keep his job.

Yet here the PCC found against the Daily Telegraph on the grounds that the explosive Murdoch story produced by under-cover reporters came from a “fishing expedition” rather than trying to check out existing rumours.

Rupert Murdoch

We also learned something this week about Rupert Murdoch’s current degree of involvement in his newspapers. The assumption goes that Murdoch senior must have known about the phone-hacking scandal because he calls up his editors on a daily basis.

There is no doubt that once he did, including deciding what party The Sun would support at general elections, as MacKenzie was able to testify. But there is now no reason to disbelieve the statements of the current Sun editor Dominic Mohan that the decision to dump Gordon Brown had been a “group decision” that Murdoch had then supported.

In his 80th year, Rupert Murdoch has bigger fish to fry than worrying about what is on the front page of The Sun every day.

The Politicians

Unsurprisingly ‘The Editors’, both present and former, turned out to be a motley lot with no very coherent view – either of the world or media regulation.

But help is at hand. Bring on the politicians… David Cameron, on why he appointed Andy Coulson and whether setting up Leveson was just a cynical knee-jerk political reaction, is a treat to look forward to.

Then Tony Blair’s relations with the Murdoch press will be worth the ticket price as will asking Gordon Brown whether he really threatened to destroyed the Murdoch empire after The Sun‘s switch of allegiance to the Tories.