Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

An Ambush of Wishful thinking and Cargo Cult law.

by ceebs Fri Apr 26th, 2013 at 01:36:21 PM EST

Yesterday, the Press made its latest move to avoid any regulation.  This week's cunning wheeze is to provide a counter proposal of the presses own Royal Charter.  From a view of the text of the new press text what they are suggesting from their version is a royal statute, is the reintroduction of the old PCC system, with an added clause that says that any future changes are not allowed without the agreement of the press, in that it would need the unanimous agreement of the recognition committee, one of the members of which is the press representative and so essentially provides a Veto.

Press regulation: newspaper industry launches rival royal charter | Media | guardian.co.uk

he newspaper industry, led by five of the country's largest press groups, has rejected David Cameron's plans for press regulation and launched a bid to set up its own royal charter-backed body.

Sun publisher News International, Telegraph Media Group, Associated Newspapers - which owns the Daily Mail - Trinity Mirror and Express Newspapers have drawn up a draft alternative royal charter, which will be put to the privy council later on Thursday.

Hacked Off, which has been campaigning for press victims, immediately condemned the move.

Other details that  are a problem, is that the press charter removes the ability of groups to appeal to the regulators, leaving the same huge technicality loophole which was one of the biggest complaints about the old PCC system. Also the regulator has the ability to direct size and placement of complaints removed, meaning that any corrections can be hidden unobtrusively to allow  the readers to never worry their pretty little heads about the papers slandering individuals.  Hacked off has a list of Alternate problems with the new press Charter. Here

Now the main papers approach since the agreement has been to rubbish any legal approach as being antithetical to a free press. Somehow this logic fails and a royal charter somehow becomes reasonable as long as they write it.  The fact that this destroys their central argument against the government sponsored Royal charter seems to have been missed by this group of Cargo Cult lawyers

Today according to Roy Greenslade in the Guardian  there is a more subtle plan in operation
Parliament's press charter is dead duck as publishers defy politicians | Media | guardian.co.uk

The royal charter on press regulation agreed by parliament is a dead duck, according to industry sources I have consulted today.

They believe that the Privy Council cannot possibly ask the Queen to grant the charter because of the rules that it is obliged to follow.
According to the council's guidance: "Any proposal which is rendered controversial by a counter-petition is unlikely to succeed."

Now this is Wishful thinking in the extreme by the press.  The rules they are seeking to apply are those that apply to independent groups applying to the privy council, Not those applying to Parliament. And Parliament has already passed the attached law.  All this press report can possibly be is Bluff, from people I have talked to, the Primacy of Parliament makes  any other  charter little more than Toilet paper. Not that the press will report this that way.

I am more than a little amazed. Nobody ever consults me about any laws which are passed, but if I broke any of them, I doubt I'd get any sympathy in court using that as a defense.

So why don't parliament just pass the damn laws and say "break these and see where the sun shines, matey". Then add a few seriously punitive measures just for fun, such as the editor of the Mail is directly responsible for everything his paper does wrong and has to be whipped within an inch of his life if anything in the paper is shown to be untrue.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Apr 29th, 2013 at 11:33:39 AM EST
Now you're just being vindictive and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
by Number 6 on Tue Apr 30th, 2013 at 04:58:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Tue Apr 30th, 2013 at 03:38:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I am more than a little amazed. Nobody ever consults me about any laws which are passed, but if I broke any of them, I doubt I'd get any sympathy in court using that as a defense.
You have clearly not read Adam Smith...
Whenever the legislature attempts to regulate the differences between masters and their workmen, its counsellors are always the masters.

The Euro will outlivebury us all --- Jean-Claude Juncker
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Apr 30th, 2013 at 05:11:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Smith, Trugot and Quesnay were really the first economists and they wrote for an elite audience. So they were free to state many things in what, today, would be considered 'shockingly bad taste'. A contemporary student of economics accustomed to stating things so baldly would have trouble assembling the necessary professors to advance to candidacy for a PhD.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Tue Apr 30th, 2013 at 09:43:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]