In the aftermath of KateGate, and the impending report from the Leveson Enquiry, a few thoughts. Not my words, but certainly a view that I subscribe to.
“We’re all in favour of press freedom … but we choose to define for ourselves what (that) freedom means”.
The operative word here becomes BUT…
“The temptation is to set the report and its aftermath in some convenient party political context. The right (Cameron, Gove, Osborne) versus the left (Miliband, Harman, Clegg). The righteous (Hugh Grant, Max Mosley et al) versus the unwashed. The ethical versus the cowboys; quality Fleet Street versus Murdoch and mayhem. Remember how many times the parties, for their own reasons, have launched royal commissions to muzzle the press”. Peter Preston in the Observer, 23 September 2012
Look at this… John Callaway 2012
Not that the press shouldn’t be held accountable for acts of gross misconduct, errant lies, fabrication and outright criminality...but…
“…Are we talking about eviscerating Murdoch, banning the tabloids, and moving piously on? Seemingly so, for a moment at least. But then rioters burn embassies in another assault on freedom of expression. Barack Obama stands firm on the first amendment. Freedom of expression is a line in the sand. And it’s a messy old world all over again….” Peter Preston: ibid.
Newspapers and their editors have to become as accountable as the rest of us, but sometimes things aren’t that simple or straightforward. Its often a question of balance…
Balance. John Callaway 2012
Or maybe as John W Gardner once said….
“The society which scorns excellence in plumbing as a humble activity and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy because it is an exalted activity will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy: neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water”
Recent comments