Steve Coogan: David Mitchell, Press Freedom Is Not Being Threatened ...

[ruby_chalice]

Last week, Observer columnist David Mitchell wrote a piece in which he argued against the involvement of politicians in press regulation. Here Steve Coogan, a supporter of the campaign group Hacked Off, responds...

Comments

[howlin_wolf_66]

Coogan may be right, but is that any reason to belittle Mitchell in public? Just take him to one side and tell him privately; don't try to humiliate him in public...

The tone of the article comes across as pompous and condescending, whether correct or not... Bad form, Coogan.

Mitchell, on the other hand, responded with class.

[freeze_i_say]

Was there any reason for Mitchell to belittle the Hacked Off people? And Coogan was right to address this in an open letter because this issue is hotly contested and Murdoch holds most of the cards when it comes to swaying public opinion on the matter.

[howlin_wolf_66]

Well to be fair, i didn't read the Mitchell article; however, as Coogan himself points out, certain discrepancies often come as part of the territory if you're trying to be funny… Coogan was bitingly sarcastic in a mean way, whilst trying to make a serious point.

If it's an open letter than you at least have a duty to be a bit more moderate in the presentation of your criticisms, rather than outright questioning the intelligence of the other party by saying you don't think they're familiar with the issue… It is usually possible to have done your research on a matter, and yet still reach an alternative conclusion.

[freeze_i_say]

I get why Coogan was pissed off though because any cursory glance at UK media right now will tell you that they are wishing this inquiry away, they're going to pin it all on Brooks and Coulson and no systemic shakeup will be ordered and any time this is covered by most mainstream media, they do portray Hugh Grant and Coogan etc as axe-grinding clowns. If freedom of press~ means a conglomerate monopoly can print the shameful Hillsborough disaster lies and get away with it for years and hack a missing dead girl's voicemail messages, sign me up for Coogan's sarcasm any day over Mitchell's paid-to-be-flippant libertarianism.

[mephisto5]

"There was a litany of abusive, exploitative behaviour heard by Leveson, of innocent people being monstered, none of which could remotely be described as being in the public interest. This goes way beyond the hacking scandal which took years to be uncovered, because even though it was widespread and known to be illegal, it was tolerated." (bolding mine)

Isn't this the problem then? That there were laws against the problems but that they just weren't enforced.

IDK if it's part of the Leveson Report, because that thing is bloody long and I haven't read it, but the following from the press gazette, here, worries me:

"Any newspapers who remain outside the Government scheme face heavy legal bills in any subsequent libel trials. Newspapers will be forced to pay costs even if they successfully defend the claim."

i.e. if a paper refuses to sign up to this charter and gets sued for libel, they will potentially have to pay out hundreds of thousands of pounds in legal fees, even if they win. This is a huge disincentive for papers to do

[lizrocks]

I know nothing about this situation but team David unless proven otherwise.

[wrestlingdog]

Ditto.

[ljtaylor]

I like Coogan's comedy but this is a dickish article.

[vulturoso]

I like his comedy and his Michael Caine accent.

[ljtaylor]

Ahaha I just YouTubed that...Brydon's is better. Marginally.

[subversive_kiwi]

Yes, but have you ever seen Brydon's Small Man In A Box voice?