UNITED KINGDOM
By Ian Beales, Editors' Code Committee, Press Complaints Commission
24 February 2003

The UK may boast one of the world's strongest newspaper industries, with 300 years of press freedom behind it, but that independence is never far from challenge. The current threats are on two main fronts: privacy, and self-regulation of the press.

Privacy has moved to the top of the political and media agenda, following the incorporation into British law of the European Convention of Human Rights. The European Court recently criticised the lack of adequate legal remedies under existing British laws, after pictures of a man attempting suicide were captured on public closed circuit TV systems, and released to the media.

One way of filling any perceived legal gap, is by developing the existing law of confidence. This was at the centre of the watershed case of Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta Jones, who sued for the right to keep their wedding pictures exclusive. The couple sued Hello magazine which published snatched pictures of the wedding as part of a spoiling operation after they were beaten to exclusive rights to cover the wedding by their rival celebrity magazine, OK.

Meanwhile, the stakes were raised further when a House of Commons Select committee set up an inquiry into privacy and media intrusion and whether there should be a privacy law. The committee is taking evidence from editors and publishers - and their alleged "victims." Although, the committee's declared aim is the protection of people not usually in public life, there is deep suspicion in sections of the media that the inquiry is a response to recent high-profile criticism of the Government in general and Tony Blair and his wife, Cherie, in particular.

As though to underline the point, regulation of the press is also on the committee's agenda, raising the issue of whether the current self-regulatory system should be made answerable to a statutory ombudsman. It also questions whether the existing sanctions of forcing transgressor newspapers and magazines to publish adverse adjudications should be bolstered by fines and compensation. These moves are being fiercely resisted by the British newspaper and magazine industry which sees its self-regulatory regime - soon to install the former British Ambassador to the U.S. as its new chairman - as being more effective, fast and free than any statutory system could be.

At the same time, a Communications Bill poses other threats. The Bill has launched a media super-watchdog, Ofcom, which would take over from all the statutory regulatory bodies covering broadcasting. It would mean the BBC could face fines of up to £250,000 for breaches of taste and decency, bringing it more into line with the independent broadcasters.

There are concerns in the British newspaper and magazine industry that Ofcom's vast remit could be extended still further to embrace regulation of the press. Although this is denied by Government, there are provisions for Ofcom to have a role in overseeing newspaper mergers, which would involve judgments on news and content. Again this is being opposed as potentially a dangerous first step towards introducing a system of state regulation of the press via the back-door.