News

Murdoch endorses 'conscience clause' for journalists proposed by the NUJ

26/04/2012

A clause allowing journalists to speak out against unethical behaviour in newspapers is a "good idea", Rupert Murdoch has said.The proprietor endorsed the conscience clause, proposed by the National Union of Journalists, when answering questions submitted by the union at the Leveson Inquiry, admitting he had never heard of the idea before. The clause could be inserted into employment contracts, allowing staff to speak out on bullying and unethical newsgathering.During the hearing, he asked John Hendy QC, representing the NUJ, why an anonymous journalist complaining of bullying at the News of the World had not simply resigned.Lord Justice Leveson replied: "I think the problem with that might be that she needs a job."To the surprise of the judge, Murdoch said he was not aware of the settlement between the News of the World and former sports reporter Matt Driscoll, who was awarded £792,736 in 2009 after being unfairly dismissed by the paper. Driscoll claimed he had experienced a culture of bullying led by editor Andy Coulson.Murdoch said he did not believe there had been any unethical treatment of journalists and photographers at News International and said staff at the News of the World seemed to be a "happy bunch" whenever he had visited the newsroom.The proprietor was questioned by John Hendy QC, representing the NUJ, over evidence submitted to the by anonymous journalists, presented by the union's general secretary Michelle Stanistreet in February.Murdoch said staff can take complaints to News International's internal staff association, funded by the company. He disagreed with Hendy, who suggested allowing the NUJ to represent NI journalists would be one step in eliminating bad practice.

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