News

Hislop: "I do not believe in a regulated press"

17/01/2012

The editor of Private Eye has told the Leveson Inquiry he does not believe in a regulated press.Ian Hislop, who gave evidence this morning, said papers should obey the law and be accountable to the public.He said: "I do hope you'll call some members of the public, and ask them why they bought the News of the World".Hislop said his magazine is “unique” and he did not want to be “tarred with the same brush” as Northern & Shell owner Richard Desmond.He admitted it was “embarrassing” that Desmond’s publications were the only other papers not in the PCC. He said he could “reconsider” joining regulation if the body was to change but was against being forced into arbitration.Hislop pointed out Private Eye publishes “two pages a week attacking individuals and newspapers” and he would not expect to get a “fair hearing” from fellow editors. He made it clear Private Eye worked in line with the PCC code, and the principles and ethics of journalism should be “self evident”.He added Desmond was the “worst” example of a proprietor setting the agenda for his newspapers, and comments he made on ethics before Lord Justice Leveson should not be taken as a “rule of thumb” for the industry.Hislop said press coverage of the inquiry had been selective, and journalists had not reported “critical” information about their publications.The editor was also asked about public interest and gave the example of Sir Fred Goodwin, who took out an injunction to prevent details of an affair with a senior colleague, as a “grey area” that should be judged by editors. He said that any “reasonable editor” would not have thought it acceptable to “hack into a murdered girl’s phone”.Hislop told the inquiry that he had been personally targeted by private investigator Steve Whittamore, who obtained numbers of his family and bank manager.

Download the full report:

Download report

Queries: campaign@hackinginquiry.org

related Posts

A year and two days: the story of one complaint to IPSO
Guest blog: Chris Goodall's complaint about fifteen errors in a Daily Mail article took IPSO a year and two days to decide. Here he publishes the full timeline — more than 80 emails, hundreds of hours of work, and one correction.
9/22/26
News
SLAPPs and the press: why the Anti-SLAPP Bill is the wrong answer
The private members Bill promoted by Baroness Stowell and Sir John Whittingdale would apply to any claim touching a matter of public interest, however meritorious and however properly brought. Hacked Off sets out why it would harm victims of press abuse, and why section 40 was the better answer.
9/21/26
News
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