Letter: Press freedom and the evasion of responsibility

Mr Granville Williams
Monday 18 January 1993 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: In a week that has seen first the leaking and then the precipitate publication of the Calcutt report (reports, 15 January) the press has subjected any attempt to discuss reform to sustained demolition. That's why there's a great danger that Clive Soley's Press Freedom and Responsibility Bill may disappear in the rubble.

The Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom is opposed to the Calcutt proposals. They are, in our opinion, a threat to press freedom. The measures - the creation of new torts, pre-publication injunctions and post-publication fines - would only benefit people wealthy enough to access these processes.

Also they would be used as a

device to gag investigations. The issue is to give rights to citizens, and not, as the Calcutt proposals do, take them away from serious journalism.

The Calcutt proposal for a three-person tribunal with powers to enforce a statutory code and impose fines is also a negative one. The composition of the tribunal would be narrow and unrepresentative, and imposing fines on newspapers would act as a form of censorship, discouraging investigative journalism and having a disproportionate effect on small publications whose existence is vital to a diverse and free media.

Clive Soley's Bill, in marked contrast, is a positive measure, designed to give rights to the citizen and promote press freedom. It would establish a legal right to the correction of inaccuracies, something that could be achieved by conciliation in most cases but, in the event of disagreement, through a procedure administered by an independent press authority. It is a measure that has nothing to do with censorship; rather, it is about giving citizens rights they can access, encouraging the work of journalists who want high standards and establishing an independent body whose job it is to promote press freedom.

These modest proposals have elicited the wrath of newspaper editors, both national and regional. We believe MPs should attend the second reading on 29 January, listen to the arguments and then make their minds up on the merits of the Bill.

Yours sincerely,

GRANVILLE WILLIAMS

National Council

Campaign for Press and

Broadcasting Freedom (North)

Upton, West Yorkshire

15 January

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in