Skip to main content

Making the same mistake twice

As I read through the Sunday news, I am struck with a sense of fatigue. The responses to the Leveson Report might have come straight from an episode of Yes, Minister. The self-serving posturing of the corporate press merely confirms all we feared most: they have a profit-driven agenda which is little or nothing to do with the national interest and which they will ruthlessly defend. The switch from open contempt of David Cameron to mild adulation, merely because the Prime Minister has essentially rejected the core recommendation of the report- that new arrangements should be underpinned by statute- reveals the Press at its cowardly, bullying, lick-spittle worst.

As it happens I am disappointed in Leveson. I think the report failed to address the rapidly changing nature of the media- the increasing diversity of media channels and the rise of citizen-journalism- and this is a critical failing. However the hysterical vituperation that has been delivered by the press, defending indefensible press intrusion on the bereaved, for example, as a matter of the "free press", makes me think that they, like so many other institutions in the United Kingdom, have long ago lost any kind of moral compass.

The fact that the Mail on Sunday felt free enough to launch yet another smear attack on Nick Clegg within a couple of days of the publication of the report is a measure of the limitless arrogance of Paul Dacre. Yet it could hardly have been a more compelling example of why the British Press has become an international by-word for immoderate hostility and corruption. In short it is not much of a step to describe the network of foreign ownership, powerful influence and the extremist venom of the so-called opinion-formers as a malevolent, evil influence on British public life.

Yet "the fault, Dear Brutus, lies not on our stars, but in ourselves". The fact is that the people of Britain allow themselves to be manipulated by the distortions, lies and special pleading that the Press serves up to them. The crisis that Britain now faces- economic, political and specifically national- needs to be addressed calmly and intelligently, and yet we continue to give ear to the barrage of greed and stupidity that passes for informed comment in Britain today. Facts are ignored or lost in a cacophony of bawling ignorance.

"My opinion is just as good as yours" is universally believed, even if some opinions are based on completely false premises. The Press does not seek out the truth between contending ideas, still less does it "speak truth to power", rather it allows people like Johann Hari to become respected columnists, even when it is clear that they are little more than fantasists. All the time, the concerned citizen seems to lack the discrimination that would filter out ideas that are not based on at least a nodding acquaintance with the facts. 

In the age of the Internet, it is a simple and immediate process to check facts. It is a measure of how twisted British journalism has become that even as the availability of facts has become easier, so ever greater errors are found in the Press. It should be a standing rebuke to every newspaper editor in the Kingdom that an organisation such as FullFact.Org can publish on a daily basis detailed analysis of claims made by scientists, politicians or the press- and can refute so easily many of the headlines.

I believe that the British Press is a major contributor to the current national crisis in Britain. The idea that these corporate entities, a large number of which are foreign owned, are the only thing keeping the British political world free of corruption is laughable. I do believe the public has a right to know. I do not think that protests by the Press we are seeing now are about the principle of right to know, I think they are about the far more limited principle of profit. I do not think that Leveson addressed the issue of the boundaries of the public domain- either a privacy law or a law on the free press. Most of all, I am sad and angry to see how easy it is for the corporate press to continue to manipulate the voters based on a false agenda. 

The rise of the blogosphere and such sites as Fullfact are a testament to the death roll of the newspaper industry- the corporate media, from Fox News and The Daily Mail, to the Guardian and the BBC, have a declining influence, yet it is still pervasive and still pernicious. In the end it is is a matter of public and personal responsibility that individuals must maintain a personal scepticism, and unless we do that, we will continue to be mislead by opinions which are private interests masquerading as the public good.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...