In a statement, the newspaper society representing 1,100 newspapers said provisions for fines of up to $1.5 million on errant newspapers would impose a “crippling burden” on cash-strapped publications struggling against the inroads of the Internet.
“A free press cannot be free if it is dependent on and accountable to a regulatory body recognized by the state,” the president of the society, Adrian Jeakings, said.
Indeed, the conservative Daily Mail commented in an editorial, “The bitter irony is this long-drawn out debate comes when the Internet — which, being global, has no regulatory restraints — is driving newspapers out of business.”
“If politicians had devoted half as much of their energies to keeping a dying industry alive, instead of hammering another nail into its coffin, democracy would be in a healthier state today.”
Newspaper proprietors and editors have not so far signed on to the agreement announced on Monday and say they were excluded from late-night cross-party talks on the new code while privacy campaigners clamoring for tighter press controls took part in the deliberations. Some indicated on Tuesday that they would not be rushed into responding to the proposed restrictions.
“We need to go back a long way — to 1695, and the abolition of the newspaper licensing laws — to find a time when the press has been subject to statutory regulation. Last night, Parliament decided that 318 years was long enough to let newspapers and magazines remain beyond its influence, and agreed a set of measures that will involve the state, albeit tangentially, in their governance,” the conservative Daily Telegraph said.
Lawmakers on Monday “urged the newspaper industry to endorse the new dispensation as quickly as possible,” the newspaper said. “However, after 318 years of a free press, its detail deserves careful consideration.”
The agreement announced Monday creates a system under which erring newspapers will face big fines and come up against a tougher press regulator with new powers to investigate abuses and order prominent corrections in publications that breach standards.
The deal, struck in the early hours of Monday, enshrines the powers of the regulator in a royal charter — the same document that sets out the rules and responsibilities of the British Broadcasting Corporation and the Bank of England.
That ended a fierce dispute, which divided the coalition government, over whether new powers should instead be written into law.
The idea of legislation raised alarms among those cherishing three centuries of broad peacetime freedom for Britain’s newspapers. They included Prime Minister David Cameron, who said a law establishing a press watchdog would cross a Rubicon — Caesar’s point of no return — toward government control because it could be amended to be even stricter by future governments that might want to curb the press.
But victims of hacking, the Labour opposition and the Liberal Democrats — the junior partners in the coalition — pointed to the failures of existing self-regulation and pressed for a “statutory underpinning” to enshrine the changes in law. That was in line with a central recommendation of a voluminous report published last November after months of exhaustive testimony into the behavior and culture of the British press at an inquiry by Lord Justice Sir Brian Leveson. His inquiry was called after the hacking scandal crested in July 2011.
There will be minor legislation to accompany the new system. One law will be amended to ensure that changes to the charter — and therefore to the system of press regulation — can be made only if there is agreement by two-thirds of both houses of Parliament. Another change will make news groups that opt out of the new regulatory system subject to higher fines for defamation. Britain’s existing legislation already includes some of the world’s most stringent defamation laws, along with rules governing what may be published on matters relating to national security and judicial procedures.
Stephen Castle reported from London, and Alan Cowell from Paris.
Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/world/europe/britain-newspapers-protest-new-press-rules.html?partner=rss&emc=rss