-

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6TcrKFevKE
http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2012/nov/19/local-newspapers-davidcameron
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/nov/11/pcc-chair-press-self-regulation
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9630793/Britains-press-must-remain-
free.html
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/oct/06/importance-free-press-alan-rusbridger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index
Define the following terms and for the later questions state their uses whilst referring to the
question centred around whether the existing press regulations are enough (topically relevant to the
hacking scandal)--------delete this specific paragraph once done
The Press Complaints Commission:
The Press Complaints Commision or PCC are a voluntary run regulatory body setup to track all major
newspaper and magazine content and to make the judgment whether it adheres to its rulings. These
rules were set by editors of major and regional newspapers in 1991. This was the year of the PCC’s
formation, setup after the PC’S (press council) demise, when it was ruled unsuitable due to the press
not following rules set by it. However the PC’s successor The Press Complaints Commission is to go
the same way as its predecessor with the announcement that the body is close in the wake of the
hacking scandal. The PCC was heavily criticised for its handling of the matter.
The Leveson Inqiury
The Leveson inquiry is a public inquiry led by Lord Leveson setup to examine press ethics. The inquiry
was setup by Prime Minister David Cameron after the hacking scandal. The Leveson inquiry led to
Lord Leveson making recommendations on how the press should reform. Lord Leveson
recommended that the press remain self-regulated and free from any government ruling
whatsoever. However this recommendation is believed to have been a catalyst for David Cameron
not accepting the report in its entirety, stating he was not convinced that the legislation
underpinning self-regulation was right. As well as this Lord Leveson also recommended a new
regulatory body should be formed.
Defamation:
Defamation is that act of harming someone’s reputation. This act of harming someone’s reputation
can be brought about through speech or print. If the victim is willing to pursue the matter as
defamation then they must also prove the speech or print to be lies. If the individual cannot prove
the print or speech to be lies than they cannot sue for defamation and the print or speech will
remain with no apology needed. In November 2012 the BBC program ‘Newsnight’ linked an
unnamed Conservative politician to be a perpetrator in a child abuse scandal in North Wales. The
name was quickly spread around social media platform; Twitter, users named senior politician Lord
McAlpine. The allegations were later proved to be false and many libellous Twitter users sued for
defamation.

2. Contempt (of court):
Contempt of court relates to being disobedient to the courtroom and/or it’s rulings, whether it is in
the court or out of court. Actions such as bringing an audio device or camera into a courtroom ranks
as contempt of court. As well as this contempt of court links to breaking a court injunction. An
example of a court injunction being broken was when James Bulgers killers, Robert Thompson and
Jon Venables had recently taken photographs of them posted on social media. This broke a court
injunction as the pair had being given expensive new identities to protect them from revenge
attacks. Those who posted the pictures were taken to court.
Copyright:
Copyright exists to protect an artist intellectual property. Copyright can only protect someone’s
intellectual property if their can be seen to be a degree of skill and original thought to the piece. If
an individual is breaching the copyright and it can’t be settled out of court, then the original creator
may decide to take the person breaching the copyright, to court. A famous case of this is when
online music service ‘Napster’ were sued and eventually liquefied due to it’s leaking of a Metallica
demo and as it eventually turned out their entire music catalogue. As it turned over 330,000 Napster
users were in breach of copyright laws.
Children & Young person act 1933
The Children & Young person act of 1933 exists to stop young people having their name, age,
address, school and image (moving or still) from being revealed when in a court case. Without this
act journalists would be able to print such information potentially endangering a child. An example
of when this has been breached is when a Plymouth newspaper named a 15-year-old stab victim
whilst court proceeding were ongoing (link below).
http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/2007/news/law/newsquest-fined-3-000-for-breaching-court-
order-on-naming-teen-stab-victim/
Confidentiality & Secrets
Confidentiality agreements exist to maintain individual or group privacy. An individual may obtain a
secret about something or someone. Confidentiality agreements exist to protect this secret from
being spread further. If the secret is spread further, the person who leaked the secret further can be
sued and taken to court. A recent case of a confidentiality agreement being broken is the high court
super injunction – or gagging order- of the affair of footballer Ryan Giggs. John Hemming who use
parliamentary privilege to break the injunction eventually broke the injunction in the House of
Commons.
Social & Cultural Awareness
Being socially and culturally aware is imperative for journalists. There are many guidelines set out by
various outlets such as The National Union of Journalists. These guidelines look to protect different
ethnic groups, cultures and groups in society from discrimination in the press. It looks at the way
articles are worded and the connotations that can be picked from them. Describing immigrants as

3. “flooding in” creates negative connotations and leaves readers with a negative view, this may be
consciously or sub-consciously.