2 HOW SELF-REGULATION OPERATES
6. In essence, the model for self-regulation of the
press is straightforward: the industry has drawn up a Code of
Practice and updates it from time to time, and possible breaches
of the Code are considered by the Press Complaints Commission
(PCC) which makes rulings and enables resolution of complaints,
imposing sanctions if necessary. The Commission came into being
in January 1991 following an inquiry into "Privacy and Related
Matters" established by the Home Secretary in 1989 and chaired
by Mr (later Sir) David Calcutt QC. The course of the Calcutt
Inquiry and its recommendations have been charted elsewhere.[4]
The PCC consists of a Board of 17 members supported by a secretariat
of thirteen full-time staff. Currently, seven of the Board members
are senior editors of national and regional newspapers and magazines
drawn from across the country. The remaining ten members are,
in the words of the PCC, "not professionally associated with
the newspaper or magazine industry"[5]
and so form a lay majority. The PCC is funded by the Press Standards
Board of Finance (PressBoF), a body formed in 1990 specifically
to co-ordinate the industry's actions on self-regulation following
the Government's acceptance of relevant parts of the report of
the Calcutt Inquiry.[6]
7. In considering complaints, the Commission and
its secretariat apply a Code of Practice drawn up by editors and
maintained by the Editors' Code Committee, composed of fourteen
editors of national and regional newspapers and magazines.[7]
Revisions proposed by the Code Committee are submitted for consultation
with the industry through trade associations before being ratified
by the PCC.[8] The Code
has sixteen Clauses setting out the standards to which editors
and their staff should work. The provisions of certain Clauses
may be overridden if it can be demonstrated that there is a public
interest in doing so.[9]
The Code's statement on public interest includes the following:
"1. The public interest includes, but is not
confined to:
i) Detecting or exposing crime or serious impropriety.
ii) Protecting public health and safety.
iii) Preventing the public from being misled
by an action or statement of
an individual or organisation.
2. There is a public interest in freedom of expression
itself.
3. Whenever the public interest is invoked, the
PCC will require editors to demonstrate fully how the public interest
was served."
8. The terms of the Code itself and the manner of
its application are strengthened by a preamble which states that
"it is essential that an agreed code be honoured not only
to the letter but in the full spirit" and that the Code "should
not be interpreted so narrowly as to compromise its commitment
to respect the rights of the individual". The Editors' Code
Committee told us that this requirement to abide by the spirit
of the Code "excludes wriggling through loopholes as an option".[10]
The preamble also requires editors and publishers to "take
care to ensure [that the Code] is observed rigorously by all editorial
staff and external contributors, including non-journalists, in
printed and online versions of publications". The Code's
provisions therefore extend more widely than might at first appear,
to cover freelancers, photographers and eye-witness reporters.[11]
9. Operating in parallel to the Editors' Code of
Practice is the code of ethics drawn up by the National Union
of Journalists, which currently has approximately 40,000 members
working as journalists or on editorial content. Union members
may be disciplined or even expelled for breaches.[12]
10. The Commission is informed of all complaints
submitted, although only a comparatively small number are discussed
in detail at monthly Board meetings. The course of a complaint
handled by the PCC will depend on whether it is deemed to fall
within the scope of the Code, whether a breach is apparent, and
whether the complainant and the editor of the publication concerned
reach an informal settlement brokered by the PCC. The various
possible outcomes are set out in the chart overleaf.
4 See for instance paragraphs 21-28 of the Fourth Report
of the National Heritage Committee, Session 1992-93, HC 294 Back
5
Ev 48 Back
6
PressBoF submission, Ev 84 Back
7
See Ev 23 for current membership Back
8
Ev 84 Back
9
Clause 3-Privacy; Clause 4-Harassment; Clause 6-Children; Clause
7-Children in sex cases; Clause 8-Hospitals; Clause 9-Reporting
of Crime; Clause 10-Clandestine devices and subterfuge; elements
of Clause 15-Witness payments in criminal trials; and Clause 16-Payments
to criminals Back
10
Ev 25 Back
11
Editors' Code Committee Ev 25 Back
12
Ev 9 Back
| 
