Freedom of the Press
 |
| Fleet Street |
When I was a boy, I
never had the vision of being a train driver, or a bus conductor, or
a fire-fighter or any other of the thousand and one occupations that
almost every boy has the ambition to fill in later life. For me,
there was only one occupation that drew me like an irresistible
magnet. I always wanted to be a newspaper reporter, an investigative
journalist who would expose corruption and wrong doing and hold those
responsible to account in the court of public opinion and even in the
courts of the land. Over the years, the press has been responsible
for exposing the scandal of John Perfumo, the excesses of Rachman and
the exploitation of homeless and vulnerable in society, the
Washington Post reporters Bernstein and Woodward, bringing down
Richard Nixon and his crooked administration in exposing the
Watergate conspiracy and more recently still the MP's Expenses
Scandal which shook the political establishment of the United Kingdom
to the core. Consequently, I hold freedom of the press to be
cornerstone of democracy.
With freedom
however, comes certain responsibilities and obligations. Over recent
years, specific sections of the press have overstepped the line and
brought the concept of press freedom into disrepute. The content of
the smear campaigns waged by these "Press Barons" has
become more and more vitriolic as each competes with the other to
fill their articles and pages with lies and allegations so outrageous
they they become almost comic. The coverage and subsequent comment by
one of these "newspapers in particularly in connection with the
Hillsborough Disaster, is a national disgrace which will remain as a
testament to media abasement. However, the sinister motivations for
these scurrilous reports and denunciations, lies in the desire of the
proprietors to impose their own values, opinions and political
structure on society by whatever means necessary. It is an attack not
only on the individual "victims", but also on democracy
itself. Personal attacks on those who oppose or are deemed to be a
threat to the position of the "establishment" as determined
by the press, are not a new phenomenon in the United Kingdom. Harold
Wilson, Michael Foot and no doubt Clement Atlee have all been
targeted to a greater or lesser extent over the years since the end
of the war. The "Reds Under the Bed" scenario, has been a
favourite scare tactic of the right wing press for many years, but it
is not only politicians of "the left", who have been
subjected to scrutiny and abuse. Attacks on ethnic minorities,
religious sects, and individuals have been hounded and persecuted by
the self appointed guardians of the nation from their executive
offices in Fleet Street and now in Kensington, Wapping or Canary
Wharf.
Over recent years,
the excesses of these "newspapers" has immeasurably
exceeded what any society can accept as reasonable and fair comment.
More recently, Sky Television News has joined the ranks of the press
inquisitors and now pursues the perceived "threats" with
lies, smears and abuse through what appears to be a collection of
specially recruited and trained presenters to berate and seek to
intimidate anyone being interviewed. Fortunately however, a number of
interviewees are able to stand up to the Sky News tactics, but all
too often the interviewer has the last word. The common factor in
both the newspaper and television ferocity, is that in all cases they
are able to "get away with it" with no sanction or censure
or any form of control being applied. In the same way as the
playground bully will push the bounds of their behaviour and become
more savage, then the media too will continue to go beyond the limits
until they are stopped. It is abundantly clear that the notion of
voluntary codes of practice, self regulation and other forms of self
discipline are not working and probably never have. There is a
compelling case for a statutory independent body with the necessary
teeth and avaiable sanctions to enforce its decisions, to watch over
the activities and practices of the media and the content of their
newspaper pages. Only in this way, will it be possible to ensure that
a free and democractic press is not overwhelmed and submerged by a
corrupt and iniquitous media, driven by a few vested interests intent
on destroying democracy in this country, as they impose their own
regime on our society.
Looking back to my
childhood ambition, I can only conclude that had history taken a
different course, I would be ashamed to be a reporter or journalist
or even part of today's media machinations.
Comments
Post a Comment