Changes

From TheBookbag
Jump to navigationJump to search
no edit summary
The (lack of) ethics of a small part of the media has produced a backlash which put me in mind of the Dangerous Dogs Act. Celebrities have paraded in front of Leveson (and our television screens) telling of how badly they've been treated - and there have been some others for whom there was a great deal of sympathy. The result is likely to be a muzzled press unable to do what it should do. And we have to remember that the right to a free press has been fought for for centuries - Hume gives brief and very readable accounts of the history. It's interesting to note that John Wilkes, remembered for his fight for a free press, would have been seen as one of the hacks which society feels the need to 'contain' were he alive today.
Hume makes the point that just about everyone makes the ''says'' that they're in favour of a free press - and then goes on to add ''but...'' and details the way or ways in which this freedom should be limited, at least for other people or in relation to themselves. He argues the need for a cultural shift not just within the press but in the public's attitude ''to'' it. Freedom is absolute - much like 'truth' or 'pregnancy' and it cannot be doled out as someone in authority sees fit. Least of all can you give freedom to the people you like - the better people - and deny it to others.
It's polemic and not presented as anything else, but it is extremely well written. I didn't find it a quick read but that was because I found my mind being pushed into corners long unvisited. There was a great deal to think about - why is it wrong for the press to pry into the lives of celebrities but laudable for Jamie Oliver to do the same thing to children's lunch boxes? I didn't agree with all of it but it can't be anything less than five stars because it made me think. And change my mind about certain things.

Navigation menu