From a motion on the Newsquest South London dispute over job cuts passed by the London Assembly: "London needs quality local newspapers to ensure democratic scrutiny, accountability, and to encourage an informed and active citizenship – these proposals do not provide that. This Assembly calls on the Mayor to continue to engage with the NUJ and Newsquest in this dispute to find a solution that maintains the quality of the South London Press publications, and commit to look at ways in which local newspaper provision can be supported in London.”
Lawyers acting for the News Media Association in a letter to the Press Recognition Panel challenging the decision to recognise IMPRESS as a regulator: “Sir Brian Leveson stated that a regulatory body should ‘be established by the industry, that it be able to secure the voluntary support and membership of the entire industry.’ IMPRESS clearly fails to meet this requirement… IMPRESS is, quite simply, unable effectively to regulate the press as it will not secure membership or support of a significant part of the industry, let alone its entirety.”
Roy Greenslade on his MediaGuardian blog: "The government, having realised the implications after intense lobbing by publishers, has yet to trigger section 40, but it’s on the statute book and could be introduced at any time. Whether you see this as a carrot to lure publishers into an approved regulator or a stick to compel them to do so, it is a form of blackmail and, by extension, inimical to freedom of expression. Why? Because it is conceivable that a publisher outside the system, such as the Guardian or Private Eye, could face crippling legal costs."
Frederic Filloux on the Monday Note: "Today, the economic value of a journalism item stems from its popularity, i.e. the number of clicks (or views) it generates. A well-crafted listicle put together by a clever Millennial will generate more revenue that any public-interest piece, this in total disregard for who actually reads it, for how long, etc. That’s the absurdity in today's system."
Guido Fawkes: "Sun reporter Anthony France, the only journalist found guilty following the Met Police’s disastrous Operation Elveden, has had his conviction quashed. France’s ordeal lasted 1,379 days – he was convicted last May – yet today he was cleared by the Court of Appeal in a 30 second hearing. Operation Elveden, which targeted journalists and arrested over 20 Sun reporters, wasted the time of 60 police officers and cost the taxpayer £30 million, has now failed to convict a single journalist."
Anthony France, quoted by Press Gazette: “Having spent more than three years and nine months fighting to clear my name, this is not a time for celebration. Nobody has ‘won’ and the public are less informed.”
The Daily Mail in a leader: "Lovers of justice will shudder at the cringe-making collusion between police and the BBC to destroy Sir Cliff Richard over spurious allegations of child abuse. Imagine the BBC’s outrage if a newspaper had broken the story in such an invasive and sensationalist manner, with such disturbing disregard for the presumption of innocence. Yet, after a cosy in-house inquiry, director-general Tony Hall insisted the BBC had no need to apologise for its coverage. This week’s court papers tell a very different story. We hear a great deal from self-professed liberals about the need for state control of the Press – already the most strictly regulated in the free world. But shouldn’t true freedom-lovers target the over-mighty, statist, self-regulating BBC."
From The Justice Gap: "More than half of all local newspaper editors acknowledge that the courts are not being adequately covered in their own papers, according to new research by the Justice Gap. The study also reports a 40% drop off in the number of court stories on a single day this year compared to the same date four years ago."
Gareth Davies @Gareth_Davies09 on Twitter: "Reporters often sent to cover openings and only able to return for the verdicts, resulting in inaccurate/misleading copy."