APPENDIX 48
Memorandum submitted by the Newcastle
Chronicle and Journal Ltd
The inquiry is to be welcomed because we believe
it will show that the current system of self-regulation—through
the Editor's Code Committee and the Press Complaints Commission—is
working effectively and efficiently.
As editors of four regional newspapers we believe
the present system is particularly effective in balancing the
rights of individuals with the wider public interest in the free
flow of information.
All journalists who work for our titles are
well aware of the practicalities of the code of practice and the
importance of the PCC. They are also aware that it is important
the code should be followed in its spirit as well as its detail.
They are made aware of the code during basic
training and through the Trinity Mirror Regionals editorial policy,
which sets out the fundamental values by which we expect our staff
to operate.
Number one on the list states: "Our editors
must ensure that they and their journalists work within the parameters
of the Editors' Code of Practice."
We believe that the code has raised standards
because it provides a clear statement of both principle and practice.
It is a working document in our newsrooms.
We also believe the code and the PCC system
is valuable in helping deal with complaints that inevitably arise
from time to time. The system enables a prompt response and the
PCC can act as a mediator.
It is fair and acceptable to both sides and
we, and other editors, accept PCC decisions and publish adjudications
when required.
We would be happy to provide examples of how
the system has worked here and how it has satisfied complainants.
The PCC is also pro-active and available to give informal advice
prior to publication of a story.
Our newspapers set great store in serving and
being part of our local communities. Our relationship with our
readers is of paramount importance.
In common with other regional newspapers we
receive far more praise and thanks for our actions than complaints
about invasions of privacy or inappropriate behaviour.
We will question and criticise the actions and
behaviour of people when appropriate—whether or not they
are in the public eye. That is an important role of the local
press. We will also highlight the positive and give praise, again
when that is appropriate.
A dynamic code of practice that can be amended
and improved when needed is the bedrock of self-regulation, the
PCC works efficiently and effectively.
A state-funded "Press Ombudsman" would
be seen as a first step to Government censorship, while a privacy
law would allow only the rich and privileged able to afford to
enforce it.
Neither would it meet the balance between the
real democratic needs of a free press and individual privacy.
A statutory system would be unacceptable because the motives behind
it would continually be subjected to question and criticism by
both the press and the public.
We believe the present system of self-regulation
is effectively providing the balance.
6 February 2003
| 
