News

Beyond parody: MacKenzie and Murdoch cast themselves as consumer champions

15/01/2015

Brian Cathcart

Newspaper
✕ Press claim

✓ The truth

Reach
Up to
people misled
Help us fight back

Join 71,384 others who are taking action to share the truth & raise standards in the press

1. Share the truth
Post this rebuttal on social media
2. Fund the fightback
Help us challenge more stories like this
Donate
3. Tell your MP
Send a ready-written email in 30 seconds
Email your MP

Kelvin MacKenzie and Rupert Murdoch have taken an initiative that is beyond parody: they have set up a consumer complaint website whose aim, according to the former Sun editor, is ‘to force companies and politicians to do the right thing’.It’s called A Spokesman Said https://www.aspokesmansaid.com and it channels and monitors complaints to big companies, more than 100 of which, including Toyota, Aviva and GoCompare, have already apparently registered.

Yet although A Spokesman Said encourages companies to take advantage of what is a ‘simple interface for you to communicate directly with customers in order to resolve their issues’ no newspaper group appears to have signed up.

Conspicuously absent from the list of companies ready to be allocated scores for their complaints handling is News UK, whose Sun and Times papers have millions of consumers every day. News UK is of course owned by Murdoch, who is reported to have put up money to back MacKenzie’s site.

Nor has MacKenzie, the cheeky-chappie former Sun editor who will forever be associated with the Hillsborough outrage, persuaded his other former employers in the newspaper industry, the publishers of the Mirror (Trinity Mirror) and the Mail (Associated), to register.

What more eloquent proof could there be that these companies are not interested in giving their consumers the power to ‘force them to do the right thing’?

The pages of A Spokesman Said, moreover, are loaded with lines that Murdoch, MacKenzie and their friends in the management of the leading national newspaper companies would choke on if they were applied to their own industry. Here are just a few:‘We believe that it is too easy for companies to ignore the issues of individuals.’

Lord Justice Leveson drew the same conclusion about the press, and Parliament and the public agreed. Yet MacKenzie’s friends (he is back at the Sun as a columnist) refused to act on the judge’s recommendations. In other words they not only ignore the issues of individuals, but of judges, public inquiries, our democratic representatives and the population as a whole.

‘The focus is on getting a solution for each complaint on an individual basis.’

Again this was Leveson’s view, but the press industry takes a different approach: for example, of the nearly 13,000 individual complaints received by its self-regulator in 2013, only 15 were upheld.

‘Our aim is simple: to encourage fair and prompt resolution to complaints by airing them in public. Firms and institutions who do the right thing – and promptly - will be rewarded with a positive customer Powerscore. Those that fail will be ranked accordingly – for everyone to see.’

Precisely the kind of transparency that Leveson called for, and which the press industry has always rejected. IPSO, the industry’s PCC retread, is as transparent as a concrete block, and there is no sign of it delivering any public ranking of papers by their performance in code compliance.

‘Companies that do not handle complaints quickly and adequately will receive poor scores.’

Quickly and adequately? Delay is built into the IPSO system with newspapers given astonishing opportunities to sandbag complainants. The objective, as Leveson put it, is to create ‘complaint fatigue’, leaving wronged individuals so weary and frustrated that they give up or settle for a paltry remedy.

And on the subject of remedies, A Spokesman Said is bold enough to invite complainants to name the ‘ideal solution’ to their grievances, offering a variety of suggestions. They include:‘I want this practice to stop’and‘I want an independent investigation’.Everything about IPSO is designed to ensure that no complaint is ever capable of altering the behaviour of the newspapers. The entire culture and structure of the body is dedicated to hushing up problems so that abuses can continue. As for independent investigations, they are anathema to the press companies and IPSO is designed to ensure that all investigations are ultimately controlled by the company managements.

Hacked Off is funded by supporters, not newspaper owners. Help us take this to Parliament: give £10 a month.

Give £10 a month

Download the full report:

Download report

Queries: campaign@hackinginquiry.org

related Posts

Coverage of Professor Arday was not legitimate: the letter The Times refused to publish
Guest blog: Professor Paul Wragg replies to the letter published in The Times on 25 August defending the press coverage of Professor Jason Arday. The Times declined to publish his reply. We publish it here in full.
8/28/26
News
Defensive, evasive & hypocritical: The press reaction to the death of Jason Arday
The reaction of national newspapers to the death of Professor Jason Arday has exposed a brittle defensiveness at the heart of the press, and a determination to remain outside any meaningful accountability.
8/26/26
News
When media abuse of academics becomes the norm in HE
Following the death of Jason Arday, Corinne Fowler writes on the toll of media abuse on academics and what universities must do to protect their staff.
8/19/26
News
IPSO ties itself in knots over Telegraph complaint
Media lawyer Jonathan Coad complained to IPSO about a Telegraph article claiming Hacked Off wants "state control" of the press. IPSO's response contradicted itself within the space of a few paragraphs.
8/14/26
News