The Leveson Enquiry into standards in the UK’s newspapers is likely to elicit strong reactions in many people. Hacks will moan about celebrities believing they have suffered as much as the parents of murdered schoolchildren (they don’t). The newspapers and their wealty owners will cry that the very notion of a free press is at stake. They will bully us into believing that a regulated press means the end of scrutiny for politicians and public bodies. They warn of a police state and the end of freedom itself.
This makes me angry. I, along with a great many others, believe in a free press. To use the public’s fear of its potential loss to further their own commercial gain is not surprising given the moral depths to which many hacks will sink. But it is worrying and sickening nonetheless. To attempt to engender fear in a public already vulnerable to economic and social worries is manipulative and self seeking in the extreme.
I am as disturbed by Hugh Grant’s testimony as I am by that of the Dowler family. What is more, I am of the opinion that the Dowler family are as disturbed by the content of Grant’s testimony as I am. In fact, the only people likely to not be affected by it are those involved in the practices he and the Dowlers describe. For those people, this behaviour is normal. Acceptable. Encouraged. Daily life. Even now there are people watching this evidence unfold who are saying to themselves – “I just don’t see what’s wrong with this”.
It takes a leap of faith to understand that there are people like this. It seems impossible, in a world where we have witnessed the horror that hate can create. However, at the most basic level, we are seeing forms of hate. Hate for an actor who has a lot of money. Hate for the wishes of a bereaved family to be allowed to exercise private grief when a profit could be turned if the grief were public. Hate for someone who stood up and said it was wrong.
It has often been said that celebrities are “fair game” in some way. Being in the public eye carries a requirement that they open up their private lives for scrutiny. The public pay their wages, so they are a legitimate harassment target. I detest this. Radio companies (mostly) pay my wages; are they permitted, by extension, to harass my loved ones in their own interests? Of course not. It’s twisted and illogical and that argument needs to be closed down immediately. This does not and could never prevent legitimate exposition of serious wrongdoing or illegality.
It’s not Hugh Grant’s fault that a free press might be at risk. When hacks and the companies that line their pockets try to create the fear, and warn of dark times to come if they are no longer allowed to harass the mother of an actor’s child, we are in dangerous territory. Leveson should be an opportunity for honest and open debate. I suspect, though, we will see more old hacks and their masters forcing down debate, closing doors and spreading malicious, unwarranted fear. For that, we need to be aware and ready to present the truth.
Filed under: Politics
