British press needs regulator, says phone-hacking inquiry

Lord Leveson concludes today a yearlong inquiry into the practices of the British press, including tabloids accused of illegal phone hacking.

Sean Dempsey/AP/Pool/File
In this file photo, Lord Justice Brian Leveson speaks during the July 2011 session of his phone hacking inquiry in London. Leveson announced his final findings this morning.

Britain needs a new independent media regulator to eliminate a subculture of unethical behavior that infected segments of the country's press, a senior judge said Thursday at the end of a yearlong inquiry into newspaper wrongdoing.

Lord Justice Brian Leveson said a new regulatory body should be established in law to prevent more people being hurt by "press behavior that, at times, can only be described as outrageous."

He said "what is needed is a genuinely independent and effective system of self-regulation."

Lord Leveson issued his 2,000-page report at the end of a media ethics inquiry that was triggered by revelations of tabloid phone hacking and expanded to engulf senior figures in politics, the police, and Rupert Murdoch's media empire.

His proposals will likely be welcomed by victims of press intrusion and some politicians, who want to see the country's rambunctious press reined in. But some editors and lawmakers fear any new body could curtail freedom of the press.

Leveson insisted in his report that politicians and the government should play no role in regulating the press, which should be done by a new body with much stronger powers than the current Press Complaints Commission.

But Leveson said it was "essential that there should be legislation to underpin the independent self-regulatory system."

He said the new body should be composed of members of the public including former journalists and academics – but no serving editors or politicians. It should have the power to demand prominent corrections in newspapers and to levy fines of up to 1 million pounds ($1.6 million).

Prime Minister David Cameron set up the Leveson inquiry after revelations of illegal eavesdropping by Mr. Murdoch's now-defunct News of the World tabloid sparked a criminal investigation and a wave of public revulsion.

The furor erupted in 2011 when it was revealed that the News of the World had eavesdropped on the mobile phone voicemails of slain schoolgirl Milly Dowler while police were searching for the 13-year-old.

Murdoch shut down the 168-year-old newspaper in July 2011. His UK newspaper company, News International, has paid millions in damages to dozens of hacking victims, and faces lawsuits from dozens more, from celebrities, politicians, athletes and crime victims whose voicemails were hacked in the paper's quest for scoops.

Leveson heard evidence from hundreds of journalists, politicians, lawyers and victims of press intrusion during months of hearings that provided a dramatic, sometimes comic and often poignant window on the workings of the media. Witnesses ranged from celebrities such as Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling and Hugh Grant – who both complained of intrusive treatment – to Dowlers, who described how learning that their daughter's voicemail had been accessed had given them false hope that she was alive.

Leveson said that the ongoing criminal investigation constrained him from accusing other newspapers of illegal behavior, but argued there was a subculture of unethical behavior "within some parts of some titles."

While many editors have denied knowing about phone hacking, Leveson said it "was far more than a covert, secret activity, known to nobody save one or two practitioners of the 'dark arts.'"

More broadly, he said newspapers had been guilty of "recklessness in prioritizing sensational stories almost irrespective of the harm the stories may cause."

"In each case, the impact has been real and, in some cases, devastating," the judge said.

The hacking scandal has rocked Britain's press, political and police establishments, who were revealed to enjoy an often cozy relationship in which drinks, dinners and sometimes money were traded for influence and information.

Leveson said over the past three decades, political parties "have had or developed too close a relationship with the press in a way which has not been in the public interest."

He acquitted senior politicians of wrongdoing, but recommended that political parties publish statements "setting out, for the public, an explanation of the approach they propose to take as a matter of party policy in conducting relationships with the press."

Parliament will have to approve the legal changes the report recommends, and Mr. Cameron is under intense pressure from both sides. He is also tainted by his own ties to prominent figures in the scandal.

Former Murdoch editors and journalists charged with phone hacking, police bribery, or other wrongdoing include Cameron's former spokesman, Andy Coulson, and ex-News of the World editor Rebekah Brooks, a friend of the prime minister.

Mr. Coulson and Ms. Brooks were appearing in court Thursday on charges of paying public officials for information.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.