Self-regulation is one of the most ethereal things of the Media industry. It seems that many companies are controlling themselves, through own rules and procedures, but is not a real surveillance. As many others recently, Cherwell writer Sian Meaney has spoken about the coverage of nude celebrities photo scandal. He concluded his article on this way: “Unfortunately, rationality tells me that this change in stance is not a watershed in journalistic ethics, but instead a financial move – in the world of journalism it becomes all too apparent that money, not morals, is what makes the world go round”.
Must be the market which bring some light to the industry? According to The Impress project, the answer is “no”. Its founding director, Jonathan Heawood, said: “We know that public interest journalism should be defended and supported at every level. We agree. That is why we are developing plans for an independent self-regulator that protects public interest
journalism, whilst dealing robustly with poor standards of journalism. By showing that journalism is accountable to the public, an independent self-regulator will make it much harder for any Government to meddle with press freedom“.
The IMPRESS Arbitration Scheme is the basis of his project, which is launching actually. They counts with the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators’ support . “Any regulator must be able to offer a service that can deal with legal claims against the press quickly, fairly and cheaply. This agreement makes IMPRESS the first press regulator to offer an arbitration service. It is the next step towards establishing IMPRESS: the Independent Monitor for the Press as a credible press regulator that meets recommendations on independence from politicians and the newspaper industry”, stated Heawood.
“Due to nobody goes to force the press to accept this regulation, I am not sure about the efficacy of this kind of ideas”, MP Dominic Grieve said about IMPRESS yesterday. Possibly, this is a common thought. Simply, a never-ending story.