By WALTER RUSSELL
MEAD
The British press
stinks, or at least a lot of it does. Sleazy tabloids run wild with reporters
hacking cell phones, getting stories under false pretenses and hounding
relatives of soccer stars and other pop idols within an inch of their lives.
Ghoulish over reporting of personal tragedies like missing children wreak havoc
and ruin lives. Laws get broken, people get hurt. After revelations that
reporters and editors at one of Britain’s biggest tabloids had gone even
further than that, a typically British response was to convene a panel of the
Great and Good to decide what to do.
The Leveson Report, released Thursday, is the result
of a lengthy inquiry into the British press and urges “the
establishment of a new system of press regulation that would be backed by
parliamentary statute.” For a look at its key recommendations as summarized by
the Guardian, go here.
The British left is screaming for parliamentary
regulation of the press. Prime Minister Cameron says this would “cross the
Rubicon”: let the politicians start regulating the press and the Ministry of
Truth is not far away. He is basically right; while the Leveson report doesn’t
call for censorship of content, it introduces the idea that an outside
regulator (theoretically independent of government) should regulate the conduct
of reporters. Such bodies accrete power over time; once the camel gets its nose
in the tent, the takeover process begins.
Britain is particularly susceptible to the disease of
controlling unpleasant speech. Mixed with its long and proud tradition as an
upholder of liberty, Britain has always had a weakness for letting the Great
and the Good dictate to the rest of society. It has an Established Church, and
for centuries people who didn’t belong to it were banned from holding office or
attending universities. Britain was traditionally much more puritanical than,
say, France when it came to censoring books, plays and later films.