Archive for the ‘legal’ Category

Spectator speaks out on Press control

November 28, 2012
Spectator December 1 2012

Spectator magazine cover

A day before the Leveson inquiry report is published, the Spectator has set itself against any statutory scheme to control the press apart from self-regulation:

‘If the press agrees a new form of self-regulation, perhaps contractually binding this time, we will happily take part. But we would not sign up to anything enforced by government.’

Magazines have been given little coverage in the controversy, but several were called to give evidence to the Leveson inquiry, including Hello!, Heat and OK!

The Spectator has lived under government control – it was founded in 1828 – and Stamp Duty, which was used to control distribution of newspapers and magazines, was not abolished until 1855.

This change created a free Press, enabled expansion and a way of meeting demand for reading material from the public – it’s easily forgotten that the works of many of the great Victorian writers were first published in magazines, from Dickens to Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes. In the newspaper world, the Guardian went from twice weekly to daily publication.

The fortunes made by the magazine magnates – Alfred Harmsworth and Arthur Cyril Pearson – built on the invention of the New Journalism in magazines to found the popular daily press – the Daily Mail, the Express and the Mirror.

Sam Delaney, a former editor of Heat, has warned that Leveson could end up muzzling the celebrity magazines:

‘Brace yourselves. By 2013, every title on the newsstand may well feature a gushing profile of Nancy Dell’Olio, lounging on a chaise longue “inside her beautiful home”.’

As the leaders of the political parties pore over the six copies of the Leveson report that were delivered to parliament this afternoon, the whole of the media awaits the next stage of the fallout from the phone-hacking scandal.

UK newspapers: Times readers run the country

Magazine timeline

IPC and the dangers of writing about Hitler

September 28, 2012

IPC has sent our press releases pushing the latest issue of NME, with the following at the bottom:

Please note, conditions apply to using the NME covers; the photographer and NME must both be credited, along with the copy ‘NME, on sale now’.

The company is on dodgy ground with such an approach. Who’s going to use the picture with that proviso? What happens next week when the issue’s no longer on sale?

The attitude of IPC was held up to ridicule after it claimed copyright over images of Hitler’s house from Homes and Gardens‘ November 1938 edition that the Guardian’s Simon Waldman had written about. IPC’s claims were exposed as spurious. The 1938 article, ‘Hitler’s mountain home’, by Ignatius Phayre describes the Berghof as ‘quite a handsome Bavarian chalet, 2,000 feet up on Obersalzberg amid pinewoods and cherry orchards’ with the funds coming from Hitler’s ‘famous book’ Mein Kampf, a ‘best-seller of astonishing power.

Ignatius Phayre wrote 5 pieces for the Catholic Herald in 1938-9 and did a profile of Edgar Wallace for Pictorial Weekly (‘Edgar – the amazing! A Henry Ford of fiction’, 16 Feb 1929). Amazon lists 6 books by that author, dating from 1911-33, with one being reprinted this year, America’s Day Studies in Light and Shade. The British Library gives his real name as William George FitzGerald.

Philsp.com has Phayre writing ‘War-Work of the King and Queen of Spain’ in The Girl’s Own Paper and Woman’s Magazine in Oct 1916.

A company like IPC has commerical rights to protect, but its business is built on journalism – and the rights of journalists need protecting too.

IPC profile

Giggs, super-injunctions and Tiger Woods

May 24, 2011
Sunday Herald Giggs front page at Indymedia.co.uk

Sunday Herald Giggs front page at Indymedia.org.uk

There was a surprise for me when I looked at my server logs for Sunday. One page had a thousand hits – when it would normally only rate a few dozen. Why? It was about the launch of Glasgow’s Sunday Herald newspaper in 1999. And the Sunday Herald was the paper that revealed that squeaky clean Ryan Giggs was the man who had taken out the super-injunction to stop a former lover spilling the beans about him.

And that’s not all I have to thank super-injunctions for. When US golfer Tiger Woods took out a super-injunction in 2009 to try and stop news of his shenanigans getting out, it was revealed that his middle name is ‘Tont’ – his full name is Eldrick Tont ’Tiger’ Woods. Not many people know that.

WikiLeaks and newspaper censorship

November 29, 2010

‘[T]here has been a lot of ill-informed comment (and sometimes downright lies) about the role of the Defence, Press and Broadcasting Advisory Committee and the DA notice system which it regulates. Cries of censorship abound.’

So writes Simon Bucks of  Sky, and vice-chair of the Defence, Press and Broadcasting Advisory Committee, which issues DA notices to the media – commonly referred to as the D notice committee. The WikiLeaks story about the US diplomatic cables has kicked it all off. Guido Fawkes and WikiLeaks itself are cited as misrepresenting the system.

Bucks then goes on to cut through the garbage with a lucid explanation of what the committee does and how the D notice system works. Required reading if you blog on the topic.

Sun readers don’t give a damn who runs the country

May 17, 2010

Running a website or blog, you’re used to your material being quoted or ripped off but it’s incredible how widely a piece can be picked up. This blog’s sister website Magforum.com has a page on British newspapers. The page begins by quoting a yellowed Guardian diary cutting from the 1980s that begins:

Times readers run the country,
Telegraph readers think they run the country,
Guardian readers wish they ran the country,
Mirror readers would run the country if…

Many web posts use it and quote the source; a Telegraph blog, for example, about Guardian-reading vets. Then there are those who just pick up things as they go. They include:

Wikipedia covers another version of the ryhme quoted in the TV series Yes Minister in 1986 (which I’m pretty sure ran after the Guardian item was published) and the British Democracy Forum has some other variants.

So from Jihad Watch to a South African policy debate; from a democracy forum to TV soap fans. Shows just how popular an idea can be. But, as the late, great Keith Waterhouse once told me: ‘I don’t use other people’s ideas [he was talking about one of mine when I was commissioning an article from him] because you never know where they’ve been.”

I did try to date the original Guardian cutting a few years ago (I think it’s 1980) but the librarians couldn’t help. If anyone does know the origins of the rhyme, I’d like to hear from them.

Dacre attacks Eady’s ‘privacy law by the back door’

November 11, 2008

Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre has launched an excoriating attack on one of England’s top judges, accusing him of making arrogant and amoral judgments in favour of celebrities that are creating de facto privacy laws.

Dacre’s condemnation of Justice David Eady comes in a talk to the Newspaper Society and published in the Guardian.

Eady has used the privacy clause of the Human Rights Act, says Dacre, to find ‘against newspapers and their age-old freedom to expose the moral shortcomings of those in high places’. Among the cases he quotes are that Eady had:

  • ruled that a cuckolded husband couldn’t sell his story to the press about a wealthy sporting celebrity who had seduced his wife. The judge had ‘placed the rights of the adulterer above society’s age-old belief that adultery should be condemned’; and
  • in effect ruled that it was acceptable for a multimillionaire head of a multibillion sport to pay women to take part in ‘acts of unimaginable sexual depravity’.
  • one man is given a virtual monopoly of all cases against the media, enabling him to bring in a privacy law by the back door.

Eady has had a ‘virtual monopoly’ of cases against the media, says Dacre, enabling him to bring in a privacy law by the back door.

Cost of court reporting soars

July 7, 2008

An earlier blog mentioned the chilling effect libel lawyer Peter Carter-Ruck had on press reporting – now it’s the courts themselves that are erecting barriers to discourage reporters from doing their jobs. Press Gazette quotes Castlemorton freelance Sarah Limbrick whose costs for accessing court documents shot up from £660 to £2,481 in just three months.

‘It is government policy to ensure fees reflect the full recovery of the cost involved in providing the service,’ said Mark Cram of Her Majesty’s Courts Service. And damn the public interest in the process, no doubt.

Maxwell will be chuckling in his grave over this one.

That queasy legal feeling

July 7, 2008

In a former incarnation as an editor at BBC/Redwood I once arrived back at work after a holiday. I was in early and sat down to open the post. There was just one other person in the open-plan office. As I riffled through the pile of letters, one stood out – with the logo of ‘Peter Carter-Ruck & Partners’ on the outside. I swear my heart stopped.

Why was Britain’s most feared firm of libel lawyers (regularly lampooned in Private Eye with a nickname too obvious to mention) writing to me? I open the bottom drawer of my desk and pull out a bottle of Bell’s (kept for medicinal reasons, of course).  My colleague comes over to see if I’m all right (she later said I had gone a funny colour).

Oh God! As I open the letter I see that it is even signed by him, not some minion. I go another funny colour, take a second slurp and start to read. ‘Dear Mr Quinn, Would you like to publish excerpts from my memoirs…’

I declined the offer – for such a colourful character, the work was mundane – but the BA magazine High-Life later took him up on it.

I was reminded of this by a piece in today’s Independent by legal editor Robert Verkaik, ‘Defame academy: the libel specialists.’ (Carter-Ruck died in 2003, but three lawyers from the firm he founded are in Verkaik’s list.) The article begins: ‘When legal letters threatening action for defamation arrive in an editor’s in-tray, the names of certain lawyers can induce a queasy feeling.’ So true.

Ford’s naming headache

July 6, 2008

Nice line in yesterday’s Guardian Weekend magazine by motoring writer Sam Wollaston, who gives a thumb’s down to Ford’s Kuga. ‘What next? The Kapree? The Ford Korteena? I preferred it in the olden days when Ford just named their cars after bad magazines for chaps: Escort, Fiesta … so why couldn’t they just carry on? Ford Penthouse, Ford Asian Babes…’ (he obviously knows his way round the top shelf.) And later ‘Anyway it’s a 4×4 (Ford Big Ones?)’

Of course, Ford isn’t unique – Range Rover Vogue – but it does seem to have made a habit of it (Ford Escort Cosmopolitan). It ran into problems with the Focus though in Germany in 1998. There, Focus is one of the biggest weeklies and a court ruled that the carmaker could not use the name. In the end, Ford paid DM1m (then about £330,000) to a charity chosen by Burda and agreed to work within marketing guidelines set by the publisher.

Grovel with Style at the Sunday Times

January 13, 2008

The Sunday Times has run an apology for taking chunks of an article from US magazine Radar and running them in its Style supplement last week. However, Radar sees the incident as an opportunity. It told the Guardian: ‘We’ll take it as a sign we need to dust off our plans for Radar UK.’


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.