Leveson report

149 views
118 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
149
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
28
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Leveson report

  1. 1. Leveson ReportBy Matthew Rogero
  2. 2. What it is about?• The Leveson Inquiry is an on-going public inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the British press following the News International phone hacking scandal. On 6 July 2011, Prime Minister David Cameron announced to Parliament that an inquiry would be established under the Inquiries Act 2005 to further investigate the affair. On 13 July, Cameron appointed Lord Justice Leveson as Chairman of the inquiry, with a remit to look into the specific claims about phone hacking at the News of the World, the initial police inquiry and allegations of illicit payments to police by the press, and a second inquiry to review the general culture and ethics of the British media.• Leveson appointed a panel of six assessors to work alongside him on the Inquiry and six barristers to be Counsel to Inquiry. The Inquiry is funded through two Government departments: the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Home Office.• Core participants were designated by Leveson as being: News International, the Metropolitan Police, victims, Northern and Shell Network Ltd, Guardian News and Media Ltd, Associated Newspapers Ltd, Trinity Mirror, Telegraph Media Group, and the National Union of Journalists. 51 victims were named by the Inquiry as of November 2011, comprising members of the public, politicians, sportsmen, other public figures, who may have been victims of media intrusion and have been granted "core participant" status in the inquiry.• Leveson opened the hearings on Monday 14 November 2011, saying, "The press provides an essential check on all aspects of public life. That is why any failure within the media affects all of us. At the heart of this Inquiry, therefore, may be one simple question: who guards the guardians?“ Hearings into the relations between press and public took place between November 2011 and February 2012 with testimony from complainants about press intrusion, journalists and media executives, those with a special interest in press behaviour and freedom, and others. These were followed in February 2012 by hearings into relationships between the press and police.
  3. 3. ConclusionNEWSPAPERS should be regulated by a new watchdog backed by law, a long-awaited report into press ethics has concluded. But the publication of LordJustice Leveson’s much-discussed report has drawn condemnation from aleading academic and editors have warned of the potential dangers ahead fornewspapers in an era of increased regulation.Michael Temple, professor of politics and journalism at StaffordshireUniversity, said the Leveson inquiry, set up to investigate wrongdoing in thewake of the News of the World phone hacking scandal, was a ‘waste ofmoney’ that had produced only a series of ‘vague generalisations’.Meanwhile Kevin Booth, editor of the Burton Mail, said valued localnewspapers were at risk of being condemned because of the actions of FleetStreet journalists.Lord Justice Leveson has recommended a new body to replace the currentPress Complaints Commission which would have the power to forcenewspapers into an arbitration process.He insisted this could not be described as ‘statutory regulation’, although anew law would be required to give the new watchdog its teeth.
  4. 4. What I thinkIn my opinion phone hacking shouldn’t be aloud. People deserve their privacyindividually. The public would not feel comfortable if someone or somethingwas hacking their phone. hacking someone’s mobile phone should be illegaldue to the fact that you invade their privacy and you take away the freespeech law. Phone companies should start increasing the security of yourpersonal data on your phone. Like I said with my opinion, the public deserveprivacy. Newspaper companies should not have the right to invade peoplesprivacy.In conclusion the phone hacking scheme shouldn’t be aloud because it breaksthe freedom rights and the privacy rights as individuals.
  5. 5. Sources• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leveson_Inquiry• http://www.burtonmail.co.uk/News/Leveson- conclusions-a-danger-to-local-news- 29112012.htm

×