Letter: Press regulation: a Bill killed, tragic revelations, the global village, sellers of sleaze

Mr I. S. O. Williams
Friday 15 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: You argue (12 January) that it is essential that the press be allowed 'to perform its proper role in a democracy'. May I draw to your attention two recent cases where a local newspaper has in my view fallen a long way short of performing its proper role in a democracy?

In the first case, a school lecturer took his own life in very tragic circumstances. The widow and two teenage children were shocked. However, at the coroner's inquest certain disturbing facts were mentioned and duly reported despite a plea not to do so. The effect of such publication on the children was devastating.

In the second case, another school teacher, in a well-known school in a neighbouring town, was convicted of a misdemeanour. However, it was featured on the front page.

Whenever the press comes under scrutiny, its inevitable response is that criticism is tantamount to censorship which puts democracy at risk. That is not the whole truth.

It is surely beyond dispute that the ordinary man in the street is entitled to redress against a rude, rough and nasty press. At present he has none. The costs of a legal action are prohibitive and no legal aid is available. When will the press accept that it is far more immediately concerned about circulation and hence profit than about democracy?

Yours faithfully,

IAN WILLIAMS

Langley, Warwickshire

13 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