DOCSLIB.ORG

Consequences of Lax Media Ownership Regulation on Freedom and Plurality of the UK's Fourth Estate Mina Khan Lehigh University

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Consequences of Lax Media Ownership Regulation on Freedom and Plurality of the UK's Fourth Estate Mina Khan Lehigh University CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Lehigh University: Lehigh Preserve Lehigh University Lehigh Preserve Volume 36 - The nitU ed Kingdom On The rB ink Of Perspectives on Business and Economics Brexit (2018) 2018 Consequences Of Lax Media Ownership Regulation On Freedom And Plurality Of The UK's Fourth Estate Mina Khan Lehigh University Follow this and additional works at: https://preserve.lehigh.edu/perspectives-v36 Recommended Citation Khan, Mina, "Consequences Of Lax Media Ownership Regulation On Freedom And Plurality Of The UK's Fourth Estate" (2018). Volume 36 - The United Kingdom On The Brink Of Brexit (2018). 2. https://preserve.lehigh.edu/perspectives-v36/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Perspectives on Business and Economics at Lehigh Preserve. It has been accepted for inclusion in Volume 36 - The nitU ed Kingdom On The rB ink Of Brexit (2018) by an authorized administrator of Lehigh Preserve. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Perspectives on Business and Economics, Vol. 36, 2018 CONSEQUENCES OF LAX MEDIA OWNERSHIP REGULATION ON FREEDOM AND PLURALITY OF THE UK’S FOURTH ESTATE Mina Khan The British media landscape faces a ubiquitous threat, one of both lack of regulation and excessive freedom in terms of concentration and ownership. This article examines the potential effects of unregulated media concentration on political relationships between prominent media owners and the UK government as well as its overall effect on UK citizens’ quality and perception of news. Introduction giant media conglomerates presenting sizeable threats to freedom of the overall press (“Who Press freedom in the UK, in reference to Owns the UK Media?”). According to the both freedom of expression as well as freedom Harvard Business Review this may be beneficial of media ownership and concentration, is in some respects, as privatization of British an issue of increasing concern due to the media companies has dramatically improved rising popularity of media practices such the economy and generated an estimated £34 as misinformation and post-reality politics. billion in additional GDP annually since the Historically, threats to press freedom have been sale of the British Telecom by the Thatcher concentrated in parts of the world in which government in 1984, the largest public democratic presence was weak, but pressures flotation at that time. Privatization has reversed of a different nature have begun to appear in losses of state-owned industries and improved UK’s fourth estate (Willems and Puddington). British citizens’ perceptions of free enterprise In the past five years, the UK has fallen 12 (Moore). However, despite the clear economic ranks in the World Press Freedom Index as benefits from privatization, its influence on a result of new regulatory measures, a dip in the media industry has arguably been divisive. rankings that does not yet even account for The rise of media giants headed by some of concerns of decreasing plurality and increasing the wealthiest in the UK, including Rupert cross-media ownership (Gayle). Murdoch, Lord Rothermere, and Sirs David The UK has one of the most heavily and Frederick Barclay, has had major political concentrated media landscapes globally. consequences, most recently culminating Lax media regulation over time has led to in the Brexit vote. Too much freedom of privatization of media and the formation of expression paralleled by lack of regulation in 102 regard to media concentration has become a of less freedom and vice versa. Tabloid media substantial threat to the UK press’s freedom has the least amount of self-censorship in all as a whole due to its consequence on plurality, forms of British media. The tabloids’ ability throttling the diversity of viewpoints. Although and willingness to publish whatever they some corporations, such as those of the want can be directly seen in the notorious aforementioned men, have substantial freedom, phone-hacking scandal—a controversial issue this comes at the direct cost of representation regarding collusion between British police of local news and other smaller outlets and and journalists employed at newspapers mediums. Journalistic integrity, including published by News International, including public trust in it, is threatened in the UK by News of the World, which was shut down as concentrated ownership. Freedom of the press a result (“Press ‘Need to Act’ After Leveson”). is under siege, counterintuitively, because of News International is a subsidiary of News too much freedom; that is, regulations are too Corporation, owned by Murdoch, whose reach, lax in terms of press ownership and market chronicled later, is one of the greatest in concentration. present-day privatized British media. A second ranking system, the Freedom of the Press 2017 Measuring Freedom of the Press report, similarly gives the UK a press freedom in the UK status of “free” (“United Kingdom Profile”). The UK scores 25 out of 100 (with 0 “most According to two widely regarded free”), which is the sum of its performance in press freedom monitoring groups, Reporters the legal environment (9 out of 30), political Without Borders (which publishes the World environment (9 out of 40), and economic Press Freedom Index) and Freedom House environment (7 out of 30). In the legal realm, (which publishes Freedom of the Press annual like the 2017 World Press Freedom Index, reports), the UK press ranks as “free.” The 2017 the Freedom of the Press report notes that World Press Freedom Index ranks the UK as the key development contributing to a status 78% higher in press freedom than the world of “less free” recently in the UK is legislation average. This analysis uses seven qualitative criteria categories and indicators, including concerning national security, such as the pluralism, media independence, and self- Investigatory Powers Act, which discourages censorship, together with quantitative analysis investigative journalism. of crimes committed against persons of the As for the British political environment media, weighed for violence (“United Kingdom: (i.e., interactions between politicians, the A Worrying Trend”). government, and other sectors of the economy), Pluralism, in the context of the World Press it is not considered a threat to British journalists. Freedom Index, refers to the representation of A separation between the press and political diverse opinions in the media. It is typically environment is necessary for media freedom high in regions of the world with media of expression, and the UK media is generally freedom, such as Great Britain, but threatened independent from political influence (“United by densely concentrated media ownership in Kingdom Profile”). The political environment the press and in television. Concentration of does not appear to directly pressure the press. media ownership is conducive to the biased However, the reverse—press pressuring treatment of news and opinions, driven by politicians—has become a significant question the political and economic agendas of wealthy of influence in the UK that can be traced media owners. As detailed later, the British as far back as the Thatcher government’s media is increasingly concentrated. assistance in the acquisition, outlined later, Self-censorship, in the World Press of a popular and fairly unbiased newspaper, Freedom Index methodology, refers to the The Times, by Murdoch’s News Corporation ability of the press to publish freely, given the (Evans). The blackmail of politicians by the environment in which the media platform is press, primarily the privately owned sector, operating, without having to censor for fear of has social and economic ramifications, as punishment. High self-censorship is indicative reflected in policy, laws, and favoritism, such 103 Table 1 Weekly (Daily plus Sunday) Market Share of National Newspaper Circulation Publisher Market Cumulative Circulation Share (%) Share (%) News Corp UK & Ireland Limited 15,818,965 33.6 33.6 Associated Newspapers (now DMG Media) 11,372,076 24.1 57.7 Mirror Group Newspapers 6,395,622 13.6 71.3 Express Newspapers 5,691,767 12.1 83.3 Telegraph Media Group 3,309,100 7.0 90.4 Independent Print Limited 2,102,236 4.5 94.8 The Financial Times Ltd 1,243,074 2.6 97.5 Guardian News and Media Ltd 1,198,526 2.5 100.0 Total 47,131,366 100.0 — Source: “Who Owns the UK Media?” as exemptions from requirements and limits Mail on Sunday accounted for roughly 50% of on media concentration. As discussed in the the shares of circulation of national Sunday case study later, press barons, like Murdoch, papers (“Who Owns the UK Media?”). In terms are able to manipulate politics to further their of revenue of the various companies (Table political, personal, and business agendas, using 2), Murdoch-owned News Corp UK & Ireland the threat of defamation. Limited and Rothermere’s DMG Media had a In this analysis, the pluralism and self- cumulative 57.7% market share (“Who Owns censorship measures from the Freedom of the the UK Media?”). Press report and the political environment The same issue repeats in television criteria from the Reporters Without Borders broadcasting. In fact, already high index help illustrate the counterintuitive effect concentration is likely to increase soon. Sky that the lack of ownership regulation has on TV and Sky Broadband (Sky plc) lead in terms limiting media freedom of expression. The of revenue (Figure 1), followed by British increasingly concentrated media ownership Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), which is the threatens the ultimate voice of independent largest public service broadcaster (“Who Owns media as political ambitions and vested the UK Media?”). Although most broadcasters interests become involved. are controlled by UK-based companies or the public (Table 3), a US-based corporation, 21st British Media Ownership Century Fox, is steadily expanding its television ownership. Murdoch’s 21st Century Fox has a Three companies controlled an estimated 39.1% share of Sky plc, and despite its initial cumulative 70% of national British newspaper failed bid, the corporation is vying for full circulation in 2015: Murdoch’s News Corp UK ownership (“Who Owns the UK Media?”).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Response to the Government Consultation on the Leveson Inquiry and Its Implementation
    Response to the Government Consultation on the Leveson Inquiry and its Implementation Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 2 The commencement of section 40 ............................................................................. 4 Option (a): Government should not commence any of section 40 now, but keep it under review and on the statute book ..................................................................... 4 Option (b): Government should fully commence section 40 now ............................ 5 Option (c): Government should ask Parliament to repeal all of section 40 now ...... 8 Option (d): Government should partially commence section 40, and keep under review those elements that apply to publishers outside a recognised regulator ... 10 Option (e): Government should partially commence section 40, and ask Parliament to repeal those elements that apply to publishers outside a recognised regulator 11 The impact of section 40 .......................................................................................... 13 The impact of section 40 on the press industry .................................................... 13 The impact of section 40 on claimants .................................................................. 19 The purpose of section 40 ........................................................................................ 22 Part 2 of the Leveson Inquiry ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Leveson Inquiry Into the Cultures, Practices And
    For Distribution to CPs THE LEVESON INQUIRY INTO THE CULTURES, PRACTICES AND ETHICS OE THE PRESS WITNESS STATEMENT OE JAMES HANNING I, JAMES HANNING of Independent Print Limited, 2 Derry Street, London, W8 SHF, WILL SAY; My name is James Hanning. I am deputy editor of the Independent on Sunday and, with Francis Elliott of The Times, co-author of a biography of David Cameron. In the course of co-writing and updating our book we spoke to a large number of people, but equally I am very conscious that I, at least, dipped into areas in which I can claim very little specialist knowledge, so I would emphasise that in several respects there are a great many people better placed to comment and much of what follows is impressionistic. I hope that what follows is germane to some of the relationships that Lord Justice Leveson has asked witnesses to discuss. I hesitate to try to draw a broader picture, but I hope that some conclusions about the disproportionate influence of a particular sector of the media can be drawn from my experience. My interest in the area under discussion in the Third Module stems from two topics. One is in David Cameron, on whose biography we began work in late 2005, soon after Cameron became Tory leader. The second is an interest in phone hacking at the News of the World. Tory relations with Murdoch Since early 2007, the Conservative leadership has been extremely keen to ingratiate itself with the Murdoch empire. It is striking how it had become axiomatic that the support of the Murdoch papers was essential for winning a general election.
    [Show full text]
  • For Parties to Merger
    Karen Bradley MP Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport Dear Secretary of State, The National Union of Journalists (NUJ) notes your statement of 3 March 2017 inviting suBmissions in relation to the proposeD full merger of 21st Century Fox Inc anD Sky plc. We welcome your statement of the same Date that you are minDeD to issue a European Intervention Notice on the Basis there may Be puBlic interest concerns, as set out in the Enterprise Act 2002, which warrant further consiDeration. The NUJ strongly supports an investigation By Ofcom into the proposeD merger, which poses a significant threat to meDia plurality anD Broadcasting stanDarDs. We Believe the merger woulD undermine the puBlic interest anD that referral for investigation unDer Section 58 of the Enterprise Act 2002 is essential. The NUJ is the voice for journalism anD for journalists across the UK anD IrelanD. It was founDeD in 1907 anD has 30,000 memBers. We are an affiliate of Both the European FeDeration of Journalists anD the International FeDeration of Journalists (IFJ). We represent journalists working at home anD abroad in all sectors of the meDia, incluDing staff, stuDents anD freelances – writers, reporters, eDitors, suB-eDitors, photographers, illustrators anD people who work in puBlic relations. As a union we have a strong commitment to the concept of meDia Diversity. Any inDiviDual, family or company which Dominates the meDia lanDscape is funDamentally Damaging to Democracy. In examining the proposeD merger, Ofcom woulD have to consiDer the already unsatisfactory situation prevailing in the UK, where the provision of radio anD television news is restricteD to the BBC anD two Dominant players in the commercial sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Hacking Affair Is Not Over – but What Would a Second Leveson Inquiry Achieve?
    7/10/2019 Hacking affair is not over – but what would a second Leveson inquiry achieve? Academic rigour, journalistic flair Hacking affair is not over – but what would a second Leveson inquiry achieve? July 25, 2014 3.57pm BST Author John Jewell Director of Undergraduate Studies, School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies, Cardiff University On we go. Ian Nicholson/PA In the latest episode in the long-running saga that is the phone hacking affair, Dan Evans, a former journalist at the News of the World and Sunday Mirror, has received a 10 month suspended sentence after being convicted of two counts of phone hacking, one of making illegal payments to officials, and one of perverting the course of justice. Coming so soon after the conviction of Andy Coulson and the acquittal of Rebekah Brooks and others, one could be forgiven for assuming that the whole phone hacking business is now done and dusted. Not a bit of it. As Julian Petley has written: “Eleven more trials are due to take place involving 20 current or former Sun and News of the World journalists, who are accused variously of making illegal payments to public officials, conspiring to intercept voicemail and accessing data on stolen mobile phones.” We also learned in June that Scotland Yard had officially told Rupert Murdoch of their intention to interview him as part of their inquiry into allegations of crime at his British newspapers. The Guardian revealed that Murdoch was first contacted in 2013, but the police ceded to his lawyers’ request that any interrogation should wait until the Coulson–Brooks trial had finished.
    [Show full text]
  • A Better Death in a Digital Age: Post
    Publishing Office Aims and scope Abramis Academic ASK House Communication ethics is a discipline that supports communication Northgate Avenue practitioners by offering tools and analyses for the understanding of Bury St. Edmunds ethical issues. Moreover, the speed of change in the dynamic information Suffolk environment presents new challenges, especially for communication IP32 6BB practitioners. UK Tel: +44 (0)1284 700321 Ethics used to be a specialist subject situated within schools of philosophy. Fax: +44 (0)1284 717889 Today it is viewed as a language and systematic thought process available Email: [email protected] to everyone. It encompasses issues of care and trust, social responsibility and Web: www.abramis.co.uk environmental concern and identifies the values necessary to balance the demands of performance today with responsibilities tomorrow. Copyright All rights reserved. No part For busy professionals, CE is a powerful learning and teaching approach that of this publication may be reproduced in any mate- encourages analysis and engagement with many constituencies, enhancing rial form (including pho- relationships through open-thinking. It can be used to improve organization tocopying or storing it in performance as well as to protect individual well-being. any medium by electronic means, and whether or not transiently or incidentally Submissions to some other use of this Papers should be submitted to the Editor via email. Full details on submission – publication) without the along with detailed notes for authors – are available online in PDF format: written permission of the www.communication-ethics.net copyright owner, except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Subscription Information Designs and Patents Act Each volume contains 4 issues, issued quarterly.
    [Show full text]
  • United Kingdom
    Sousa, H., Trützschler, W., Fidalgo, J. & Lameiras, M. (eds.) (2013) Media Regulators in Europe: A Cross-Country Comparative Analysis Braga: CECS, University of Minho ISBN: 978-989-97244-7-1 pp. 180 -191 United Kingdom ALESSANDRO D’ARMA Communication and Media Research Institute CAMRI, University of Westminster [email protected] 1. LEGAL FRAMEWORK The main media and communications regulatory body in the UK is the Office of Communications (Ofcom), with offices in London. Ofcom is a statutory body, organizationally separated from government and operating at arm’s length from it, created by the Office of Communications Act 20021. Its main powers and functions were conferred on it by the Communications Act 20032, which sets out no less than 263 separate statutory duties3. Ofcom is accountable to Parliament to which it reports on its activities annually. As will be detailed below, Ofcom has regulatory duties across most of the ‘converging’ electronic communications sector, often in an advisory capacity to government in areas such as media ownership rules and public service broadcasting, and is in charge of implementing and enforcing legislation. Other Acts of Parliament under which Ofcom operates include the Broadcasting Acts 19904 and 19965, the Human Rights Act 19986, the Enterprise Act 20027, the Wireless Telegraphy Act 20068, and the Digital Economy Act 20109. There are other governmental and non-governmental bodies that have powers and duties in relation to media and communications matters. The two main government depart- ments with policy responsibilities over media and communications are the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS).
    [Show full text]
  • Whittingdale and the Ex-Dominatrix: Conspiracy of Silence Or
    Whittingdale and the ex-dominatrix: conspiracy of silence or provided by LSE Research Online View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk CORE goobrought to you by d press behaviour? blogs.lse.ac.uk/polis/2016/04/13/whittingdale-and-the-ex-dominatrix-conspiracy-of-silence-or-good-press- behaviour/ 2016-4-13 This is the original version of an article that appeared in Newsweek on 13.4.16. The John Whittingdale ‘dominatrix’ story is a classic case study of the eternal balancing act between the right to privacy and the public interest in disclosure. In practice this is rarely a purely ethical or editorial decision. Inevitably, legal, political and taste issues will come into play. The circumstantial details are vital. Yes, ‘publish and be damned’ but in a country without a First Amendment, there has to be a justification. In the highly competitive UK newspaper market editors hate to spike juicy tales of politicians and former sex workers. Yet, in the febrile debate over British journalism that has followed the Leveson inquiry into phone-hacking we find ourselves in the intriguing situation where the advocates of restraint, such as the pro-regulation campaigners at Hacked Off, are urging publication of details of the private love life of an unmarried individual. John_Whittingdale There is a good reason to publish this story now. The suspicion is that when some newspapers knew about it back in 2013/14 they did not run with it because they feared pushing the Secretary of State responsible for media regulation into implementing Lord Justice Leveson’s suggestions for statutory oversight of the UK press.
    [Show full text]
  • The Finkelstein Inquiry: Miscarried Media Regulation Moves Miss Golden Reform Opportunity
    Vol 4 The Western Australian Jurist 23 THE FINKELSTEIN INQUIRY: MISCARRIED MEDIA REGULATION MOVES MISS GOLDEN REFORM OPPORTUNITY * JOSEPH M FERNANDEZ Laws are generally found to be nets of such a texture, as the little creep through, the great break through, and the middle-sized are alone entangled in.1 Abstract The Australian media’s nervous wait for the outcome of media regulation reform initiatives came to an abrupt and ignominious end in March 2013 as the moves collapsed. The Federal Government withdrew a package of Bills at the eleventh hour, when it became apparent that the Bills would not garner the required support in parliament. These Bills were preceded by two major media inquiries – the Convergence Review and the Independent Media Inquiry – culminating in reports released in 2012. The latter initiative contained sweeping reform recommendations, including one for the formation of a government-funded ‘super regulator’ called the News Media Council, which the media generally feared would spell doom especially for those engaged in the ‘news’ business. This article examines the origins of the Independent Media Inquiry; the manner of the inquiry’s conduct; what problem the inquiry was seeking to address; the consequent recommendations; and ultimately, the manoeuvres for legislative action and the reform initiative’s demise. This article concludes that the Independent Media Inquiry was flawed from the outset and * Head of Journalism, Curtin University. This article is developed from a presentation by the author to the Threats to Freedom of Speech Conference hosted by the Murdoch University Law School on 12 October 2012 at Perth, Western Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Signal and the Noise
    nieman spring 2013 Vol. 67 no. 1 Nieman Reports The Nieman Foundation for Journalism REPOR Harvard University One Francis Avenue T s Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 Nieman VOL Reports . 67 67 . To promoTe and elevaTe The sTandards of journalism n o. 1 spring 2013 o. T he signal and T he noise The SigNal aNd The NoiSe hall journalism and the future of crowdsourced reporting Carroll after the Boston marathon murdoch bombings ALSO IN THIS ISSUE Fallout for rupert mudoch from the U.K. tabloid scandal T HE Former U.s. poet laureate NIEMAN donald hall schools journalists FOUNDA Associated press executive editor T Kathleen Carroll on “having it all” ion a T HARVARD PLUS Murrey Marder’s watchdog legacy UNIVERSI Why political cartoonists pick fights Business journalism’s many metaphors TY conTEnts Residents and journalists gather around a police officer after the arrest of the Boston Marathon bombing suspect BIG IDEAS BIG CELEBRATION Please join us to celebrate 75 years of fellowship, share stories, and listen to big thinkers, including Robert Caro, Jill Lepore, Nicco Mele, and Joe Sexton, at the Nieman Foundation for Journalism’s 75th Anniversary Reunion Weekend SEPTEMBER 27–29 niEMan REPorts The Nieman FouNdatioN FoR Journalism at hARvARd UniversiTy voL. 67 No. 1 SPRiNg 2013 www.niemanreports.org PuBliShER Ann Marie Lipinski Copyright 2013 by the President and Fellows of harvard College. Please address all subscription correspondence to: one Francis Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02138-2098 EdiToR James geary Periodicals postage paid at and change of address information to: Boston, Massachusetts and additional entries. SEnioR EdiToR Jan gardner P.o.
    [Show full text]
  • Whole Day Download the Hansard
    Monday Volume 663 8 July 2019 No. 326 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Monday 8 July 2019 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2019 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT MEMBERS OF THE CABINET (FORMED BY THE RT HON. THERESA MAY, MP, JUNE 2017) PRIME MINISTER,FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY AND MINISTER FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE—The Rt Hon. Theresa May, MP CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER AND MINISTER FOR THE CABINET OFFICE—The Rt Hon. David Lidington, MP CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER—The Rt Hon. Philip Hammond, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT—The Rt Hon. Sajid Javid, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS—The Rt. Hon Jeremy Hunt, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION—The Rt Hon. Stephen Barclay, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE AND MINISTER FOR WOMEN AND EQUALITIES—The Rt Hon. Penny Mordaunt, MP LORD CHANCELLOR AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR JUSTICE—The Rt Hon. David Gauke, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE—The Rt Hon. Matt Hancock, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR BUSINESS,ENERGY AND INDUSTRIAL STRATEGY—The Rt Hon. Greg Clark, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE—The Rt Hon. Liam Fox, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK AND PENSIONS—The Rt Hon. Amber Rudd, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EDUCATION—The Rt Hon. Damian Hinds, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ENVIRONMENT,FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS—The Rt Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Chief Executive's Report July 2020
    PRP24(20) PRESS RECOGNITION PANEL BOARD CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S REPORT – JULY 2020 Meeting: by email Status: for noting Lead responsibility: Susie Uppal, Contact details: 020 3443 7072 Chief Executive Purpose 1. The purpose of this paper is to provide an update to the Board on Executive activity since the June 2020 CE report. 2. The Board is invited to note the contents of the Chief Executive’s report. Executive summary 3. The Board is being updated in respect of organisational, financial and banking matters. Delivery updates Finance update 4. A bank-reconciled set of management accounts as at 30 June 2020 is attached at Annex A. The deficit for the period to date is £10,522 against the year to date forecast of £22,217. This represents a positive variance of £11,695 compared to the year to date forecast. The bulk of this variance (£10,175) relates to budgeted HR and recruitment costs which are still anticipated later in the year. Delivery update 5. The annual report and financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2020 were laid in Parliament and the Scottish Parliament on 21 July 2020 with copies provided for information to the Northern Ireland Assembly and the National Assembly for Wales. I wrote to the NAO to express appreciation for the smooth and efficient conclusion of the audit. page 1 of 3 Board recruitment update 6. The Assessment Panel held an online meeting with Green Park to review the shortlist of candidates and agreed the final group for interview. The interviews will be held on 16 and 17 September 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • The New UK Model of Press Regulation
    MEDIA POLICY BRIEF 12 The New UK Model of Press Regulation Hugh Tomlinson QC Matrix Chambers DECLARATION OF INTEREST The author is the Chair of the campaigning group Hacked Off and was involved in negotiations with the Government in relation to the Leveson recommendations. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author would like to thank the series editors for all their assistance in the preparation of this brief. The LSE Media Policy Project is funded by the Higher Education Innovation Fund 5 with additional support from the Open Society Foundation. LSE Media Policy Project Series Editors: Sally Broughton Micova and Damian Tambini Creative Commons Licence, Attribution – Non-Commercial. The licence lets others remix, tweak and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms. March 2014 LSE Media Policy Project http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/ 2 KEY MESSAGES The Leveson Report on the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press proposed a system under which the independence and effectiveness of a self-regulator set up by the press could be assured through a process of independent “audit” or “recognition”. The Royal Charter on Self-Regulation of the Press establishes an independent Recognition Panel, which does not regulate the press, but decides whether a self-regulator meets pre-set criteria for regulatory independence and effectiveness. The Recognition Panel is independently appointed and protected from political interference by the terms of the Royal Charter and by a statutory requirement that a two-thirds majority of both Houses of Parliament is required to amend that Charter.
    [Show full text]