Imperial Party forum Forum Index Imperial Party forum
Looking from a great past towards a great future!
www.imperialparty.co.uk
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

SINISTER CAMPAIGN TO PREVENT PRESS EXPOSING CRIMES IN LORDS

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Imperial Party forum Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
thomas davison
Party Leader


Joined: 03 Jun 2005
Posts: 3356
Location: northumberland

PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2017 11:17 am    Post subject: SINISTER CAMPAIGN TO PREVENT PRESS EXPOSING CRIMES IN LORDS Reply with quote

Sinister campaign that could prevent the Press from exposing crimes to be voted on in the Lords today
Peers have tabled a raft of ‘chilling’ amendments to the Data Protection Bill
Changes would make it easier for rich and powerful to avoid being accountable
Amendments would make it more difficult to carry out investigative journalism
Move threatens 300 years of a free Press by removing public interest principle
By Ian Drury Home Affairs Editor For The Daily Mail
PUBLISHED: 01:04, 13 December 2017 | UPDATED: 01:58, 13 December 2017

Proposals which could let criminals, rogue business leaders and corrupt politicians escape being exposed will be voted on in the House of Lords today.

In a fresh assault on Press freedom, peers have tabled a raft of ‘chilling’ amendments to the Data Protection Bill passing through Parliament.

Changes would make it easier for the rich and powerful to avoid being held to account by making it more difficult to carry out investigative journalism and protect the identity of sources who reveal wrongdoing.

Some of the amendments are aimed only at newspapers, but others would affect every media outlet, from national newspapers and broadcasters including the BBC to small community newspapers, charities and think-tanks.

Proposals which could let criminals, rogue business leaders and corrupt politicians escape being exposed will be voted on in the House of Lords today
Proposals which could let criminals, rogue business leaders and corrupt politicians escape being exposed will be voted on in the House of Lords today

Crucially, the latest moves threaten 300 years of Press freedom by undermining the principle that journalists have the right to print whatever information they believe is in the public interest, and only answer for it to the courts afterward.

The Bill aims to deliver a 21st century data protection regime. It would strengthen rights and empower individuals to have more control over their personal information, while slapping heavy fines on organisations that did not protect sensitive data.

Significantly, as proposed by ministers the legislation provides an exemption for journalists who access and store personal information without consent when reporting news in the public interest.


But the amendments would make it easier for individuals to find out what information journalists hold about them – and prevent it being used before any article has even been published.

The changes would only exempt material ‘necessary’ for publication – not material compiled as part of a probe but never used.

That would mean criminal masterminds, terror suspects, paedophiles, rogue business bosses and philandering MPs could stifle stories.

A second amendment would strip out freedom of expression safeguards, and could see the public interest in investigating wrong-doing being trumped by an individual’s right to privacy – a further obstacle to publishing reports the public have a right to read. Critics also fear amendments are being used as a ‘backdoor route’ to force publishers to join state-approved regulator Impress, which depends on money from the former Formula One boss Max Mosley.

Under the existing Bill, as proposed by the Government, the exemption for journalists depends on whether their reporting is in the public interest, as defined by the Ofcom code, the BBC editorial guidelines or the Editors’ Code of Practice of the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso).

Almost all national and local newspapers, including the Daily Mail, are members of Ipso, which is entirely free of state control and is recognised in other pieces of legislation, including the existing Data Protection Act. But some peers want to remove Ipso from the legislation and replace it with Impress, which covers only a handful of hyper-local publications and blogs.

This would make it impossible for the newspapers read by most members of the public to claim full journalistic exemption.

Mr Mosley, who has handed millions to the controversial regulator, has been a vocal supporter of more restrictive regulation on the Press since being exposed by the News of the World for taking part in an S&M orgy with prostitutes.

A further Labour amendment to the Bill would mean that the Information Commissioner would have powers to decide whether codes of conduct under which journalists work should be recognised by the new law – therefore allowing the state the power to interfere in the Press.

Peers will also try to rewrite the new law so that a second half of the Leveson inquiry into Press standards would go ahead, potentially binding journalists.

And another amendment would force publishers, however large or small, to pay all the costs of data protection claims – their own and their accusers – even if a court had vindicated their investigation and reporting.

The amendments would have hampered probes by the Daily Mail. These include the long-running campaign to convict the murderers of Stephen Lawrence, our exposure of how BBC TV licence fee collectors were bullying families and how charity fundraisers were hounding pensioners for donations.



Sinister campaign that could prevent the Press from exposing crimes to be voted on in the Lords today
Peers have tabled a raft of ‘chilling’ amendments to the Data Protection Bill
Changes would make it easier for rich and powerful to avoid being accountable
Amendments would make it more difficult to carry out investigative journalism
Move threatens 300 years of a free Press by removing public interest principle
By Ian Drury Home Affairs Editor For The Daily Mail
PUBLISHED: 01:04, 13 December 2017 | UPDATED: 01:58, 13 December 2017

Proposals which could let criminals, rogue business leaders and corrupt politicians escape being exposed will be voted on in the House of Lords today.

In a fresh assault on Press freedom, peers have tabled a raft of ‘chilling’ amendments to the Data Protection Bill passing through Parliament.

Changes would make it easier for the rich and powerful to avoid being held to account by making it more difficult to carry out investigative journalism and protect the identity of sources who reveal wrongdoing.

Some of the amendments are aimed only at newspapers, but others would affect every media outlet, from national newspapers and broadcasters including the BBC to small community newspapers, charities and think-tanks.

Proposals which could let criminals, rogue business leaders and corrupt politicians escape being exposed will be voted on in the House of Lords today (file idiot) +1
Proposals which could let criminals, rogue business leaders and corrupt politicians escape being exposed will be voted on in the House of Lords today (file idiot)

Crucially, the latest moves threaten 300 years of Press freedom by undermining the principle that journalists have the right to print whatever information they believe is in the public interest, and only answer for it to the courts afterward.

The Bill aims to deliver a 21st century data protection regime. It would strengthen rights and empower individuals to have more control over their personal information, while slapping heavy fines on organisations that did not protect sensitive data.

Significantly, as proposed by ministers the legislation provides an exemption for journalists who access and store personal information without consent when reporting news in the public interest.


But the amendments would make it easier for individuals to find out what information journalists hold about them – and prevent it being used before any article has even been published.

The changes would only exempt material ‘necessary’ for publication – not material compiled as part of a probe but never used.

That would mean criminal masterminds, terror suspects, paedophiles, rogue business bosses and philandering MPs could stifle stories.

A second amendment would strip out freedom of expression safeguards, and could see the public interest in investigating wrong-doing being trumped by an individual’s right to privacy – a further obstacle to publishing reports the public have a right to read. Critics also fear amendments are being used as a ‘backdoor route’ to force publishers to join state-approved regulator Impress, which depends on money from the former Formula One boss Max Mosley.

Under the existing Bill, as proposed by the Government, the exemption for journalists depends on whether their reporting is in the public interest, as defined by the Ofcom code, the BBC editorial guidelines or the Editors’ Code of Practice of the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso).

Almost all national and local newspapers, including the Daily Mail, are members of Ipso, which is entirely free of state control and is recognised in other pieces of legislation, including the existing Data Protection Act. But some peers want to remove Ipso from the legislation and replace it with Impress, which covers only a handful of hyper-local publications and blogs.

This would make it impossible for the newspapers read by most members of the public to claim full journalistic exemption.

Mr Mosley, who has handed millions to the controversial regulator, has been a vocal supporter of more restrictive regulation on the Press since being exposed by the News of the World for taking part in an S&M orgy with prostitutes.

A further Labour amendment to the Bill would mean that the Information Commissioner would have powers to decide whether codes of conduct under which journalists work should be recognised by the new law – therefore allowing the state the power to interfere in the Press.

Peers will also try to rewrite the new law so that a second half of the Leveson inquiry into Press standards would go ahead, potentially binding journalists.

And another amendment would force publishers, however large or small, to pay all the costs of data protection claims – their own and their accusers – even if a court had vindicated their investigation and reporting.

The amendments would have hampered probes by the Daily Mail. These include the long-running campaign to convict the murderers of Stephen Lawrence, our exposure of how BBC TV licence fee collectors were bullying families and how charity fundraisers were hounding pensioners for donations.


YOU HAVE TO LAUGH DONT YOU WHEN THE MEDIA DONT REPORT WHAT IS REALLY HAPPENING ANY WAY BUT ARE A PROPAGANDA ARM OF THE GOVERNMENT AND AS FOR THE BIASED BRAINWASHING CLUB THEY HAVE A MANDATE TO SPEW OUT MISS-INFORMATION 24 HOURS PER DAY
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Imperial Party forum Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You can edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group. Hosted by phpBB.BizHat.com


For Support - http://forums.BizHat.com

Free Web Hosting | Free Forum Hosting | FlashWebHost.com | Image Hosting | Photo Gallery | FreeMarriage.com

Powered by PhpBBweb.com, setup your forum now!