Ian Hislop: ' We don't need a state regulated press' - video

[@WorldNews92]

How about instead of regulating the press, regulate its ownership. Instead of being dominated by Murdoch, et al. (which is just as bad as state domination), have newspapers be self-owned and self-regulated. In Ireland, the Irish Times is owned by a charitable trust. Titles like the Guardian, the Independent, the Times, the Telegraph, the Daily Mail, the Express, etc. could each be owned by charitable trusts. If a journalist did anything illegal, they would be prosecuted under already existing laws, and the newspaper would sack them rather than censor themselves. Restrict any commercial ownership newspapers to 'one company, one title'. It would reduce commercial domination of the press, inhibit the need for state regulation, and would give us a genuinely free press.

[@nicholasdickens2801]

One way to keep the Murdoch's in check, is to make the costs of taking a case to court is for the costs to be affordable for ordinary people. The damages awarded should be much higher. The penalty of possibly receiving a large stinging fine would possibly make them think twice. If the cost of damages is a large amount, a large amount should be given to them, then the rest to a charity of their choice. The paper should publish a large apology.

[@Treblaine]

That won't work, Murdoch will just end up being the top donors to said charities. You think Murdoch runs these papers to make money? Oh no no no... you know in the First World war, one of the founding rules of Britain's propaganda corps is the propaganda must never be given out for free, those who consumed the propaganda must pay for it. Because when you buy it... you're far more inclined to believe it. Newspapers aren't about making money from telling people about what's going on? It's just influence peddling. It's the latest form of propaganda for one powerful entity or another, be it a political party, a social movement, corporate interests or just selling yourself to the highest bidder any way you like. Propaganda is powerful, everyone is in the game now.

[@Treblaine]

​@hognoxious How fucking DARE you stoop to the level of hurling accusations of being a LIAR because I don't preemptively agree with your conjecture. It is NOT a fucking lie that Murdoch is about influence peddling and he will peddle that influence any way he can, including through charitable foundations. Just be fortunate that Ireland is not in his sights. What's a lie is that these "charities" can somehow remain impartial just because they're non-profit. What INHERENTLY stops them being captured by the money of any powerful interests? So what if you won't take murdoch's money, will you take money from a Saudi Prince? Will you take money from a russian oligarch? Will they take money from Donald Trump? This absurd idea that the poor working class are stilling on billions of dollars of spare cash they are itching to donate when the lie here is DENIAL of who these donors really are. Denial of the fact that the only people with the means and inclination to make big donations are the filthy filthy rich who have been using their money to peddle agendas that will make them even richer! Because this is not state ownership this is not the media being taken over by the government, this is just handing control to some other unaccountable group who are in the business of taking money in a world where there are private jets full of scoundrels with stacks of cash used to buy influence. Don't think being accountable to the government is any better, every time the tories get into power they won't hesitate to put their thumb on the scales to have media coverage serve to perpetuate their power.

[@tomrado1687]

@@Treblaine as did Tony Blair

[@nejuw]

Absolutely. There should be rules on how many media (tv/radio/newpapers/local newspapers) one person can own. We have a serious problem with this in Ireland. The same man nearly won a contract for privatising our water supply with the full support of FG government only the people took to the streets from all classes.

[@Treblaine]

The baroness really did a good job of dodging how there's already laws to protect her from personal harassment, she just doesn't want to use them for precisely where they are supposed to be used.

[@TallinnTadgh]

I think that's the first time i've seen IH rattled and a little prickly. I can only assume he wasn't informed of the uncomfortable situation C4 news would put him in. Trying to defend the indefensible actions of some sections of the press in front of the mother of a victim of their actions would have got me riled as well. Both interviewees deserve great credit for their answers and yes i thoroughly agree with Ian we don't want state regulation of the press but something needs to change. A public interest clause in the contractual right to own a national paper / tv station perhaps

[@Bulletguy07]

@TallinnTadgh.....it's safe to say C4 news were being a little bit naughty here as it was plainly clear from what Hislop said they hadn't asked him on the programme to answer questions relating to a matter which had no knowledge of. I agree with the points you made.

[@fdsdh1]

I know yours is an old comment but I have been watching a few of these C4 interviews and they always seem like massive car crashes. It is like they keep trying to get a "GOTCHA" moment and it is just cheap shots which don't really go anywhere.

[@tjfSIM]

Government press regulation: absolutely NOT. Independent civil regulation: absolutely YES. There does need to be heavier regulation of the press, in my opinion, protecting civilian causes. I don't approve of Government influence by any means, but when tabloid arseholes like Piers Morgan invade the privacy of citizens, there needs to be a more robust mechanism in place for dealing with this, and ideally for preventing it in the first place.

[@hellodavey1902]

I agree and well said.... funny how sometimes a single sentence/comment can perfectly encapsulate what an entire inquiry or news discussion tries to do. That said, do you think there also needs to be discussion and decisions between where we draw the line between civil and criminal behaviour? Eg in this case, should we consider stalking by photographers and/or having photographs of ourselves published without consent a civil offense or a criminal act?

[@jimosborn3411]

Problem is there's no such thing as Civil Independence.. Every business, authority, state, and even civil servants, be it public or private sector, have a political agenda. Example 'The Independant' is a left-wing newspaper, you cannot expect any form of political middle which is incorruptible because that doesn't exist. I'm not defending those such as Pier Morgan. What he and many other journalist's did was indefensible. But their are already laws against trespassing, harassment and privacy. The problem is these laws are not updated often enough to reflect real world cases, they become outdated and most of the time don't get enforced. Trespassing for example. You only get taken to court for trespassing if you cause damage to the property or 'enjoyment' of the property. If it's a large amount of money (over£10k) it goes to high court and your case will be seen in 3 months, if it's less you'll need to wait for 9 months.. Thus giving the defence in most cases time to find a legal loop-hole to wriggle out of it. You technically have the right to use 'reasonable force' to defend your property from trespassers, but also you can't use excessive force, which every premiership footballer and member of public knows is just a small tap. The press have the same rights as court appointed bailiffs when in comes to 'gaining peaceful entry into a property' which is another form of outdated law. The Police can't be expected to enforce it. Despite the fact they're usually populated with morons, they've been underfunded for years. The laws are there, its just a lot of them are not enforced. The privacy laws which were eventually enforced in regards to the phone hacking, the journalists who got found out went to jail and the ones that didn't remained and went on to host GMB on ITV. ITV is run by spineless capitalists. They've have Pol Pot hosting GMB if they thought it would boost viewers. We don't need more laws. The current laws need to be updated and properly enforced, in a way which protects citizens.

[@GiratinaofFury]

Press doesn't need harsher regulation, it needs a better code of ethics. The extent that the press will go to for a story, such as infringing on personal liberty and even outright lying, is disgraceful. Don't shut down papers, shut down bad journalists.

[@mrid5850]

The problem here is that these 'bad journalists' are acutally very good at their job. But also very badly mannerd. There are laws in place which forbids such things, that is what the law is for. And if one doesn't want to deal with this while in the aftermath of a trauma, there are surely people you could hire, or people around you who would want to help deal with the situation.

[@annicecooper8105]

Typical Channel 4 ' journalism by ambush ' tactics. Well done to both for keeping the debate on track and not taking the bait Cathy was offering.

[@shmookins]

It's the "so what you're saying is ..." woman. RUN, IAN. RUN!

[@IoEstasCedonta]

That is some epic flail at 3:57.

[@danishpastry2885]

Nice to listen to someone who knows what they are talking about

[@jonathaneffemey8828]

Thanks for posting.

[@azzyclark3860]

You don't like a newspaper? - Don't buy it.

[@rowanstree]

Presumably, most people read newspapers to access the news, i.e. relevant and truthful reporting. We don't 'like' the newspaper arbitrarily, but because we imagine that it is honest and ethical. However, how can we know? You like your flatterer, are made happy by your drug dealer, are firmly persuaded your cult leader reveals divine mysteries. One doesn't address the problem of flattery, chemical addiction or mass indoctrination by glibly telling victims, addicts and blind devotees that if they don't like it, leave it.

[@georgepreston7845]

I don't think this lady bought the paper, did that help her?

[@danpat6838]

Newspapers often don't make a profit anymore. The ones that still exist today are bankrolled by billionaires to push their agenda

[@ZenMaster4President]

"The last thing you want is to have to start using the law" !!!???

[@NigelRudyard]

We don't need a state-regulated press. But we do need a state-regulated state.

[@shanebevan3743]

A simple solution to this problem is if the press (either paper's or media) run a story that is wrong they have to use the same amount of time or coloum inches saying why they are wrong. so if channel XYZ run a story about someone or something for 4 minutes on the 10 O'clock news and it turns out to be false, they have to run a story on why it was wrong for 4 minutes in the same time slot, same with the papers or websites if they print a story on the front page that is proven to be wrong they have to run a story on why it was wrong on the front page.

[@Snagprophet]

If it was me and the state refused to take action to prevent my harassment then why shouldn't I seek permanent solutions to stopping a member of the press harassing me?

[@eddiegeorge6114]

Newspapers can be very useful and helpful. 1; emergency loo roll 2; wrapping paintbrushes in and protective sheeting; temporary blinds,among others. However,i can't understand the need for staples holding them together. So glad the telegraph doesn't use them as the larger sheets make life so much easier. They used to enhance the smell and flavour of fish and chips until the pc snowflakes put a stop to it. I think newspapers are wonderful in some ways,and for that reason i'll continue to buy them. I only buy my local paper now though,and Private Eye. The local doesn't use staples so i read it and recycle it. The Eyes i keep and re read.

[@paulgibbons2320]

In the security industry, you buy yourself a licence. If you breach the rules, then they take your license away. This could work with the media. If a journalist publishes untrue or misleading articles, the regulator can suspend the licence or take it away. Number of licences removed would indicate the integrity of the news service. Could have a court house or hearing body. (SiA in security) Specifically for dealing with journalistic standards. Make it mandatory that a retraction takes op the same print space as the original article. Free speech does not mean that we should accept deception and deceptive practices or that you can get away with grossly misleading content. We do need safe guards against that. Drawing a distinction between 'News' and 'Views'is also becoming vitally important. We need to clean up the media. We need to clean up our politicians. Lies are becoming hard currency.

[@ianhaines2873]

Of course the press don’t want to be held to any rules. They want to print what they like and make money from it. Ian Hislop, a magazine editor, is no different.

[@arynrowland862]

Anytime he’s pressed on the very serious issue of press intrusion on the lives of private citizens, he cowers from it. He represents the problem with “free press”, there is zero accountability.

[@jamesmarshall8292]

There are already laws to protect her

[@nickhalliwell4625]

The press is regulated not by the state but by the super rich. Im suprised in Ian as surely he knows if the press was regulated in the UK there would be big efforts to make it transparant and ensure it was not an intrusion on freedom just as the BBC makes a massive effort to appear neutral.

[@nicholasdickens2801]

The present set up isn't perfect, but the press is free. The fact the Murdoch's of this world dictate small, gossipy, celebrity stories doesn't take away that the press do occasionally break and pursue stories of great interest. The Daily Mail helped expose the murderers of Stephen Lawrence in 1993. They spent over 20 years pursuing justice.

[@cacambo589]

+Nicholas Dickens They spent over 20 years pursuing circulation and not investigating Savile, surely.

[@eskimoglenn]

So say no to regulation. The law defines you have an opportunity to ask for redress.

[@myroseaccount]

We don't need a state regulated press. That is an obvious statement that no one can disagree. But that is not the issue. And Hislop is wrong to say we have a free press. We have a press that is OWNED. The issue which is so often avoided, is OWNERSHIP. Who owns the media? We need a broader and more diverse media with wider ownership where a full variety of views can be expressed and heard by the maximum number of people. Currently, 4 men, 2 of them twin brothers control nearly 80% of the print media in the UK. That is a problem, especially where their media interests do not stop with the print media. And secondarily, we need a genuine functioning investigative journalism. This is now practically dead in the mainstream press and only now exists with remaining older timers like Hersch, Oborne, Pilger, Hitchens and Fisk. All of whom are marginalised to some extent. Or excellent journalist / bloggers through social media.

[@paulgibbons2320]

Time we talked about freedom from properganda.

[@connieescarria6408]

The press to be held liable. Keep things professional and ethical. Report facts not opinions and feelings. Respect the public and not bully. Laws were made to protect the people not turn them into victims.

[@jameshumphreys9715]

There a huge difference between freedom of the press and corruption of the press.

[@petergreen2552]

We don't need state regulation. We need better press. Look at the bulk of the daily papers. Nothing more than opinionated comics. Don't ever forget how certain publications behaved post Hillsborough and on how they treated the late Princess of Wales.

[@debenhamproductions2]

Never seen a person blink so regularly

[@joelang6126]

That's what we have now.

[@jameswallace7091]

Ian is right but that lady makes a couple of good points although I do disagree with her on the whole.

[@Elmo9001]

I don't like to disagree with Ian but when you see the shit the Daily Mail, Daily Express and The Sun get away with, I really can't accept that this is okay. We don't need a state regulated press, but we do need the press to be regulated by an independent body.

[@kangaroo1888]

Elmo9001 raise the reading age which would hit the tabloids

[@peterporkeresq.2817]

Isn't 'Slippery Slope' a logical fallacy? Always fascinating when people bring it up as a logical basis for their argument.

[@colinoverton8897]

How many baronesses daughters are stabbed? We should be told!

[@jaredgarbo3679]

At least 1.

[@classicartfoundation639]

there's no such thing as 'freedom' we may as well live in Russia

[@Nickbaldeagle02]

+Danny Boy The U.S. prison population rate is highest in the world, at 716 per 100,000 of the national population, according to the International Centre for Prison Studies. Russia’s is 475 prisoners per 100,000 of the national population, and China’s is 121 per 100,000 population. The U.S.A. the land of the free, currently has more prisoners than Russia and China combined and yet Russia and China are supposed to be evil communist dictatorships that imprison people for tiny infractions. Go figure.

[@Iennda]

+Nick Baldeagle Have you had the amazing joy of living in Eastern Europe after the WW2? Because man, living under the rule of Russians sucks ass. And we get to see a lot of things being done very similar now, when Putin is half Tsar, half General Secretary, basically.

[@pietzsche]

+Danny Boy in russia freedom presses you.

[@mikeystorm275]

We so fucking do..

[@davethompson4764]

bwavery,,,she has a speach impediment...upper class or what..

[@ms.antithesis]

based

[@eldeeb6433]

1:09