Newspapers: Regulation

1) Keith Perch used to edit the Leicester Mercury. How many staff did it have at its peak and where does Perch see the paper in 10 years' time?

Leicester Mercury had 130 staff members at its peak.
Perch sees the paper if print, very expensive and small circulation but if online , then it will be free with less staff running it.

2) How does Perch view the phone hacking scandal?

He suggests that because the police didn’t handle the case well, the newspaper had to get involved which meant that they got caught in between  it.


3) What does IPSO stand for and how does it work?

IPSO-  Independent Press Standards Organization
If a newspaper has a complaint and doesn’t do anything within 28 days IPSO intervenes and sees if it is eligible for a adrift and then they demand a rectification of the page.

4) What is Perch's view of newspaper ownership?

He thinks that newspapers shouldn’t be owned and harshly regulated, especially big coorperations such as Rupert Murdoch’s brands. He is a believer in freedom of speech.

5) Do you agree with his view that broadcast news should have less regulation so that TV channels can support particular political parties or people?

No, I think broadcast news should have more regulation to make sure there is less false news and immoral activity occurring within the stories that are being put out.



Write an essay on your blog answering the following question:

What are the arguments for and against statutory regulation of the newspaper industry? 

Your answer should be at least 750 words and feature a minimum of five paragraphs.

The newspaper industry carries many questions about the regulation process. There are many arguments for and against this matter.

Some people who are against the idea of statutory regulation argue that it goes against a simple idea of freedom of speech. By having the government filter what people decide to write in the papers acts as a barrier for people to not be able to express their own thoughts aloud. Even though a test had been carried out showing that 80% of the people had voted for a statutory regulation to occur, it has been later shown that only 50% of people vote meaning it does not take account of everyone hence making the statistics unreliable.

On the other hand, there are people who are for the idea of statutory regulation. As time goes on, we start to see more and more diverse news stories. Some good but some are not so. The papers are not limited to a certain age group and anyone can read them including very young children. By having content that may not be suitable for them (Eg. deaths, serious injuries or any other harmful content to children) on the newspaper, it becomes an issue for them. Furthermore, it is also argued that certain topics are morally wrong. Topics such as war photography can be seen as immoral. Taking pictures of the suffering and horrible war sights can be a huge shock to readers.

This can then be argued that the war photographers are there to put out and educate the readers to show them what war is like. It is argued to be a form of educational information. The use of taboo topics is there because people need to know about what the world consists of.. They believe that people should know everything without restrictions and that means doing anything inn order to make sure that people get all the information possible to them.

However, this also touches upon the human right of privacy. Taking the Miller Dowler case into consideration, the hacking of the dead girls phone was a direct invasion of privacy whether she was dead or not. By doing whatever journalist wanted to do in order to gain new information to the point of even hacking into the personal privacy of a dead girl was seem as outrageous and fuelled the argument for why statutory regulation should be put in place. A violation of human rights is not to be joked about and neither should it me tolerated.

In conclusion, I believe that statutory regulation should definitely be put in place as there are just too many things in the media that are either harmful to children of tap into the immoral actions. I do believe that people should have freedom of speech but the way they pass on their point should change. By having the government check through the articles allows there to be a standard to what kind of information and pictures are being put into the papers that should affect not only one group of people but everyone around the globe. If people have decided to vote for the current government, they should be able to trust them enough to regulate the newspapers.