DOCSLIB.ORG

Survey Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Survey Report YouGov / Media Standards Trust Survey Results Sample Size: 2030 GB Adults Fieldwork: 31st January - 1st February 2013 Voting intention 2010 Vote Gender Age Social grade Region Lib Lib Rest of Midlands / Total Con Lab Con Lab Male Female 18-24 25-39 40-59 60+ ABC1 C2DE London North Scotland Dem Dem South Wales Weighted Sample 2030 550 663 197 645 512 447 987 1043 246 518 694 572 1157 873 260 660 434 499 177 Unweighted Sample 2030 502 693 155 613 530 456 955 1075 186 515 778 551 1331 699 311 674 401 465 179 % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % The Government set up the Leveson Inquiry in 2011, in the wake of the phone hacking scandal, to inquire into the culture, practices and ethics of the press. In 2012 it published its report and recommendations for a new system of press regulation. How closely, if at all, have you personally been following news of the Leveson inquiry and press regulation? Very closely 6 5 7 8 5 7 6 8 3 8 7 5 4 7 4 6 5 4 6 8 Fairly closely 35 36 39 41 36 37 44 42 29 30 29 35 44 37 33 34 33 38 36 36 Not very closely 46 50 44 42 49 46 43 39 53 45 48 48 43 44 48 40 47 47 46 49 Not at all 13 9 10 10 11 11 7 10 15 18 15 13 9 11 15 20 14 11 12 7 1 © 2013 YouGov plc. All Rights Reserved yougov.co.uk Fieldwork: 31st January - 1st February 2013 Voting intention 2010 Vote Gender Age Social grade Region Lib Lib Rest of Midlands / Total Con Lab Con Lab Male Female 18-24 25-39 40-59 60+ ABC1 C2DE London North Scotland Dem Dem South Wales Weighted Sample 2030 550 663 197 645 512 447 987 1043 246 518 694 572 1157 873 260 660 434 499 177 Unweighted Sample 2030 502 693 155 613 530 456 955 1075 186 515 778 551 1331 699 311 674 401 465 179 % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % Lord Justice Leveson recommended that the press set up a new self regulatory body governed by an independent board, and underpinned by a new law. He recommended that: Newspapers should be obliged to print corrections and apologies when they get things wrong The new regulator should have the power to investigate serious breaches of standards There should be a relatively fast and free alternative to the courts, for members of the public who feel have been libelled, harassed or had their privacy intruded upon In return, newspapers that agreed to be part of an independent and effective system would be protected from some of the high costs and damages of legal action against them. Generally speaking, do you think the government should or should not implement Lord Justice Leveson's recommendations? Should implement the recommendations 74 76 79 79 73 76 85 74 75 61 73 76 80 78 70 69 75 75 74 81 Should not implement the recommendations 9 13 7 9 11 8 5 12 6 14 9 8 7 9 9 11 7 11 9 9 Don't know 17 11 13 12 15 15 11 15 19 25 18 16 13 14 21 20 18 14 18 10 Thinking about the need to ensure independent and effective regulation of the press, and the need to protect press freedom, which of the following best reflects your view? For press regulation to be effective and 52 52 58 63 49 56 62 54 51 37 50 55 57 54 49 48 53 53 53 52 independent it needs to be backed up by a law Any regulation of the press backed by a law would risk the freedom of the press and political 23 32 18 19 31 18 20 27 19 27 23 22 24 22 24 23 23 24 23 25 interference Neither 8 7 9 7 7 10 6 7 9 10 8 9 7 7 10 8 10 6 7 10 Don't know 16 10 16 11 13 17 12 12 21 27 20 14 12 16 17 21 14 17 18 12 2 © 2013 YouGov plc. All Rights Reserved yougov.co.uk Fieldwork: 31st January - 1st February 2013 Voting intention 2010 Vote Gender Age Social grade Region Lib Lib Rest of Midlands / Total Con Lab Con Lab Male Female 18-24 25-39 40-59 60+ ABC1 C2DE London North Scotland Dem Dem South Wales Weighted Sample 2030 550 663 197 645 512 447 987 1043 246 518 694 572 1157 873 260 660 434 499 177 Unweighted Sample 2030 502 693 155 613 530 456 955 1075 186 515 778 551 1331 699 311 674 401 465 179 % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % An alternative means of trying to ensure that a new system of press self-regulation is independent and effective is to have it monitored by a new body which is set up using a Royal Charter. This would avoid the need for a new law but, on its own, would not achieve all of Leveson’s recommendations. How much confidence would you have in... A press regulator set up by the newspapers, backed by a new law A lot of confidence 6 6 8 6 5 7 6 7 5 7 8 5 5 6 5 5 5 5 7 8 A fair amount of confidence 34 35 32 44 36 34 37 36 32 36 37 31 35 37 30 33 37 34 30 38 TOTAL A LOT/ FAIR AMOUNT OF CONFIDENCE 40 41 40 50 41 41 43 43 37 43 45 36 40 43 35 38 42 39 37 46 Not much confidence 34 37 33 34 36 31 37 34 33 30 30 36 35 33 35 30 31 36 36 37 No confidence at all 12 10 13 9 11 13 12 12 12 7 9 15 13 12 12 13 12 12 12 10 TOTAL NOT MUCH / NO CONFIDENCE 46 47 46 43 47 44 49 46 45 37 39 51 48 45 47 43 43 48 48 47 Don't know 14 11 14 7 12 16 8 10 18 21 16 14 11 12 17 19 14 13 15 8 A press regulator set up voluntarily by the newspapers, without any legal backing A lot of confidence 1 2 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 3 1 A fair amount of confidence 11 12 11 15 14 10 11 13 10 17 15 9 8 12 11 11 12 11 12 10 TOTAL A LOT/ FAIR AMOUNT OF CONFIDENCE 12 14 13 15 15 12 12 15 11 19 18 10 9 13 12 13 12 12 15 11 Not much confidence 37 41 37 38 39 37 37 37 37 37 38 35 38 37 36 35 38 38 32 47 No confidence at all 36 36 37 40 35 38 43 38 35 23 29 42 43 37 35 33 36 37 38 34 TOTAL NOT MUCH / NO CONFIDENCE 73 77 74 78 74 75 80 75 72 60 67 77 81 74 71 68 74 75 70 81 Don't know 14 10 13 6 11 14 9 10 18 21 16 13 10 12 16 19 14 13 15 8 A press regulator set up by the newspapers, and backed by a Royal Charter A lot of confidence 5 6 5 4 7 5 5 6 4 3 4 6 6 4 6 4 6 5 5 5 A fair amount of confidence 30 35 29 33 35 27 29 31 29 35 31 28 29 30 30 28 30 30 29 33 TOTAL A LOT/ FAIR AMOUNT OF CONFIDENCE 35 41 34 37 42 32 34 37 33 38 35 34 35 34 36 32 36 35 34 38 Not much confidence 36 36 35 42 35 33 41 37 34 31 35 36 38 38 33 32 36 38 35 38 No confidence at all 12 8 14 12 8 17 13 14 11 7 11 15 14 12 13 15 11 11 13 14 TOTAL NOT MUCH / NO CONFIDENCE 48 44 49 54 43 50 54 51 45 38 46 51 52 50 46 47 47 49 48 52 Don't know 17 14 17 10 15 18 12 12 22 24 20 16 13 16 19 22 18 16 18 9 3 © 2013 YouGov plc. All Rights Reserved yougov.co.uk Fieldwork: 31st January - 1st February 2013 Voting intention 2010 Vote Gender Age Social grade Region Lib Lib Rest of Midlands / Total Con Lab Con Lab Male Female 18-24 25-39 40-59 60+ ABC1 C2DE London North Scotland Dem Dem South Wales Weighted Sample 2030 550 663 197 645 512 447 987 1043 246 518 694 572 1157 873 260 660 434 499 177 Unweighted Sample 2030 502 693 155 613 530 456 955 1075 186 515 778 551 1331 699 311 674 401 465 179 % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % A press regulator set up by the government, backed by a new law A lot of confidence 13 14 15 14 13 13 13 13 12 14 11 13 14 14 11 7 12 14 15 16 A fair amount of confidence 41 46 41 51 41 41 47 43 40 29 42 42 44 43 39 43 41 40 41 44 TOTAL A LOT/ FAIR AMOUNT OF CONFIDENCE 54 60 56 65 54 54 60 56 52 43 53 55 58 57 50 50 53 54 56 60 Not much confidence 22 19 23 22 20 21 23 23 20 29 21 22 18 21 22 20 22 25 19 21 No confidence at all 10 10 7 5 14 9 7 11 9 7 10 9 13 9 11 8 11 9 10 9 TOTAL NOT MUCH / NO CONFIDENCE 32 29 30 27 34 30 30 34 29 36 31 31 31 30 33 28 33 34 29 30 Don't know 15 12 14 8 11 15 10 10 19 21 16 14 11 13 17 22 14 12 15 9 The Leveson Report recommended that senior politicians publish details of all meetings with media owners, newspaper editors or senior executives, and whether they discussed media policy at them.
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]
  • Why Journalism Matters a Media Standards Trust Series
    Why Journalism Matters A Media Standards Trust series Lionel Barber, editor of the Financial Times The British Academy, Wednesday 15 th July These are the best of times and the worst of times if you happen to be a journalist, especially if you are a business journalist. The best, because our profession has a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to report, analyse and comment on the most serious financial crisis since the Great Crash of 1929. The worst of times, because the news business is suffering from the cyclical shock of a deep recession and the structural change driven by the internet revolution. This twin shock has led to a loss of nerve in some quarters, particularly in the newspaper industry. Last week, during a trip to Colorado and Silicon Valley, I was peppered with questions about the health of the Financial Times . The FT was in the pink, I replied, to some surprise. A distinguished New York Times reporter remained unconvinced. “We’re all in the same boat,” he said,”but at least we’re all going down together.” My task tonight is not to preside over a wake, but to make the case for journalism, to explain why a free press and media have a vital role to play in an open democratic society. I would also like to offer some pointers for the future, highlighting the challenges facing what we now call the mainstream media and making some modest suggestions on how good journalism can not only survive but thrive in the digital age. Let me begin on a personal note.
    [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]
  • MOD100024092 the Leveson Inquiry
    WITNESS STATEMENT OF JOANNE KATHLEEN ROWLING I, JOANNE KATHLEEN ROWLING, of Schillings 41 Bedford Square, London, WC1B 3HX WILL SAY as follows:- 1. I make this statement as a Core Participant in the Leveson Inquiry as chaired by the Rt.Hon Lord Justice Leveson ("the Inquiry"). I am an author, professionally known as J.K. Rowling. My ’Harry Potter’ series of novels were (initially) published over the years 1997 - 2007 and have enjoyed a great deal of commercial success. The novels have also been adapted into a series of feature films. The first film in the series premiered in 2001 with the final film being released worldwide in July of this year. As a result of those successes, for which I am very grateful, I have gone from being what I would describe as ’an ordinary person’ to someone who is - to an extent - ’famous’. The purpose of this Statement is to try to explain some of the experiences I have had as a result of my rise in prominence. MOD100024092 The Leveson Inquiry Before describing some of those experiences, I would like to stress that I do not want to be involved in the Inquiry as a result of any personal vendetta against the press. I have none. On the contrary, I acknowledge and support the vital role that the press plays as part of a free and democratic society. As an author I strongly believe in freedom of expression. I believe that the right to be informed and to share ideas is essential. If I had not been able to freely express my ideas over the years I would not be in the privileged position that I am today.
    [Show full text]
  • Feral Beast": Cautionary Lessons from British Press Reform Lili Levi University of Miami School of Law, [email protected]
    University of Miami Law School University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository Articles Faculty and Deans 2015 Taming the "Feral Beast": Cautionary Lessons From British Press Reform Lili Levi University of Miami School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/fac_articles Part of the Communications Law Commons, and the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons Recommended Citation Lili Levi, Taming the "Feral Beast": Cautionary Lessons From British Press Reform, 55 Santa Clara L. Rev. 323 (2015). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty and Deans at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TAMING THE "FERAL BEAST"1 : CAUTIONARY LESSONS FROM BRITISH PRESS REFORM Lili Levi* TABLE OF CONTENTS Introdu ction ............................................................................ 324 I. British Press Reform, in Context ....................................... 328 A. Overview of the British Press Sector .................... 328 B. The British Approach to Newspaper Regulation.. 330 C. Phone-Hacking and the Leveson Inquiry Into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press ..... 331 D. Where Things Stand Now ...................................... 337 1. The Royal Charter ............................................. 339 2. IPSO and IM
    [Show full text]
  • Submission from IPPR to the Leveson Inquiry: Module 4
    Submission from IPPR to the Leveson Inquiry: Module 4 The IPPR welcomes this opportunity to contribute to Module 4 of the Leveson Inquiry’s deliberations: Recommendations for a more effective policy and regulation that supports the integrity and freedom of the press while encouraging the highest ethical standards. The main part of this submission draws upon a public attitudes survey commissioned by IPPR in late May 2012 into trust, impartiality and ownership in UK media. We hope the Inquiry will find the responses to this survey a helpful insight into how public attitudes are shaping up on some of the key issues the Inquiry is tackling as it draws together its evidence and analysis under Module 4. Background The IPPR’s Next Generation Media Project is focused mainly on producing a set of clear principles to shape and underpin future media policy. This is necessary both in response to the collapse of public trust following the phone hacking scandal and in the face of longer-standing challenges posed to traditional regulatory systems around the world by the disruptive effects of convergence in digital media content and platforms. The project will cover the areas of regulation and ownership and aims to bring some consistency to the rules that would apply both to traditional and new media forms as they converge. The Next Generation Media project starts with a recognition that there are competing policy priorities in this space. We believe it is important to focus on what is do-able, as well as what is desirable, within the technological constraints of a globalised media marketplace, the economic constraints of sustaining a valuable industrial sector which is in some cases struggling to survive – never mind grow and develop – and the democratic constraints on how far Parliament can go (or will be prepared to go) in limiting freedoms of expression and action in increasingly open public forums.
    [Show full text]
  • British Media Coverage of the Press Reform Debate : Journalists Reporting Journalism
    This is a repository copy of British media coverage of the press reform debate : journalists reporting journalism. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/165721/ Version: Published Version Book: Ogbebor, B. orcid.org/0000-0001-5117-9547 (2020) British media coverage of the press reform debate : journalists reporting journalism. Springer Nature , (227pp). ISBN 9783030372651 Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence. This licence allows you to distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon the work, even commercially, as long as you credit the authors for the original work. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ British Media Coverage of the Press Reform Debate Journalists Reporting Journalism Binakuromo Ogbebor British Media Coverage of the Press Reform Debate Binakuromo Ogbebor British Media Coverage of the Press Reform Debate Journalists Reporting Journalism Binakuromo Ogbebor Journalism Studies The University of Sheffield Sheffield, UK ISBN 978-3-030-37264-4 ISBN 978-3-030-37265-1 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37265-1 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2020. This book is an open access publication. Open Access This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence and indicate if changes were made.
    [Show full text]