|Wednesday 29 February 2012|
|Why we’re launching the Counter-Leveson Inquiry|
On Monday, in his opening remarks at the second part of the Leveson Inquiry into press ethics, Lord Justice Leveson said he found ‘publicly expressed concerns’ about the inquiry ‘troubling’. Well, m’lud, you had better prepare to be further troubled. For today, spiked launches the Counter-Leveson Inquiry, an intellectual two-fingered salute to the creeping conformism and censoriousness being unleashed by the Leveson process.
The most remarkable thing about Leveson’s admission to feeling troubled by public criticisms is that, sadly, there has been very little public criticism of his showtrial of the tabloids. You could count on one hand, or at a stretch two hands, the number of journalists and politicians who have dared to question the right of one judge to marshal celebrities and coppers to the cause of redefining the ethics of the press.
It is alarming that, in a country where the poet John Milton demanded freedom of the press more than 350 years ago, and where many other writers and activists subsequently fought tooth-and-catapult to expel state forces from the worlds of writing and publishing, so many should now acquiesce to an inquiry which gives a judge and his chums the power to tell the media what its morals should be. The conformism amongst the targets of the inquiry – that is, the press – is even more shocking than the cockiness of the organisers of it, those figures of authority who seem to have forgotten that the press is supposed to investigate them, not vice versa.
This is about to change. spiked has been raising concerns about the likely consequences of the crusade against ‘unethical’ tabloids since before Leveson was set up, and we have continually criticised the Leveson process for creating a censorious climate in the here and now, even before its recommendations have been made. And now we plan to gather together our arguments, and intensify them, in a Counter-Leveson Inquiry which will put the case against Leveson, against judges and police getting to tell the press what its ethics should be, and against any stricture whatsoever on the right of the press, whether highbrow or low-rent, to investigate and publish what it sees fit.
Why? Not because we hold a candle for tabloid newspapers, but because we carry a torch for press freedom, because we believe that Milton’s rallying cry is as fitting today as it was in 1644: ‘Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.’
We need your support in making a stand for press freedom. Join the Counter-Leveson Inquiry Facebook page – and help us build our war chest by donating generously here.
|Monday 3 November 2014|
‘A venal political attack on the press’
The Australian’s Chris Mitchell on the illiberal liberals threatening press freedom.
|Tuesday 21 October 2014|
‘The best answer to bad speech? More speech’
Nick Gillespie on Fox News, press freedom, and our new media utopia.
|Wednesday 15 October 2014|
‘The Establishment is trying to choke journalism’
David Dinsmore, editor of the Sun, on the challenges to press freedom.
|Monday 6 October 2014|
How UK liberals helped police hack the press
Tabloid-bashing crusaders enabled the state to treat journalists like jihadists.
|Wednesday 1 October 2014|
Brooks Newmark: another chance to bash the tabloids
Post-Leveson, even Tory sex scandals are deemed unacceptable.
|Thursday 4 September 2014|
It’s official: phone-hacking is not a crime or a scandal
When it’s Britain’s secret police hacking the tabloid Sun, that is.
|Thursday 14 August 2014|
Operation Tuleta: a warrant to hound the tabloids
|Thursday 7 August 2014|
The fight for press freedom – still a war without end
Now we know: anti-hacking hysteria was just a flag of convenience.
|Thursday 3 July 2014|
In defence of hacks who break the law
The phone-hacking scandal is being used to criminalise investigative journalism.
|Wednesday 25 June 2014|
A battle for the soul of UK journalism
The bigger issue behind the phone-hacking trials is the future of a free press.
|Tuesday 17 June 2014|
Freedom of the press is never ‘case by case’
If the US is to remain committed to press freedom, ‘reporter's privilege’ must be extended to all.
|Wednesday 26 February 2014|
The Snowden Files: a case study in hypocrisy
Luke Harding's book reads like an unwitting parody of Guardianista narcissism.
|Monday 23 December 2013|
Free speech: a year of living undangerously
In 2013, freedom has too often been given up without a fight.
|Wednesday 11 December 2013|
A new free-speech outfit – for less press freedom?
Even World Press Freedom Hero Sir Harold Evans backs a tough new regulator.
|Thursday 5 December 2013|
Who wants to be an ‘ethical journalist’?
Role models vs rogues: journalism’s phony divide.
|Thursday 31 October 2013|
Press found guilty – of being too free
The Royal Charter debate is based on the myth UK journos need taming.
|Wednesday 30 October 2013|
‘The CPS asked me to stop selling Private Eye. I said “No”’
A newspaper seller tells spiked why he refused to cave in to officialdom's demands.
|Wednesday 23 October 2013|
Why should the DPP define press freedom?
Step forward the liberal media’s new hero: the Director of Public Prosecutions.
|Thursday 10 October 2013|
We don’t need no regulation
Hey, politicans, leave the press alone!
|Wednesday 4 September 2013|
A pox on your ‘public interest’!
The ethics of journalism shouldn’t be dictated by the police, judges - or the Guardian.