By Thomas Kinsella

‍

Reputation 2025, the Press Justice Project's first conference of 2025, took place on January 29th at Miller Insurance.

‍

Among the panelists were some the UK's most eminent media lawyers, regulatory experts and journalists.

‍

The future of press regulation

‍

The first panel was a discussion between 3 members of press complaints bodies. Former Independent editor Chris Blackhurst chaired the panel, and the conference heard from Lexie Kirkconnell-Kawana(Impress CEO), Charlotte Dewar (IPSO CEO) and Chris Elliott (former Guardian readers’ editor). Each of them explained the organisations they represent and the varying ways they regulate portions of the press in the UK.

The panellists discussed whether regulators should be on the side of readers or the publishers. Charlotte’s answer that IPSO must be “independent” was met with some murmuring from the crowd, and she was quick to point out that in terms of accessibility to the complaints procedure, this is an area where IPSO will always be on the side of readers. Both Lexie and Chris Elliott were more adamant that the regulator must be on the side of the reader.

Discussion then turned to the low levels of trust in journalism. Chris Elliott and Lexie discussed the role of social media in the degeneration of trust, the role of search optimisation and “clickbait”. Charlotte questioned whether we could discuss journalism as a whole unit and pointed out that people are still trusting papers that align with their political views. There was also acknowledgement from each that upholding journalistic standards will be crucial to upholding trust, and Lexie made comparisons to other regulated professions such as pilots and Doctors where trust is still high.

Finally, there was discussion of the role of partisanship in the press. Lexie acknowledged that partisanship will always occur, but accuracy must be upheld, and this view was supported by Charlotte and Chris. However, Charlotte also acknowledged the potential for divergent fact bases and the need to support both sides.

The panel ended with questions from the floor, where there was a discussion focusing on the split regulatory market and ways in which this could be addressed, as currently readers may struggle to understand the system.

Developments in media law

The second panel was run by Hugh Tomlinson KC and Lorna Skinner KC. This was part of a regular series of talks at Press Justice Project events where leading lawyers in the media and defamation world present on recent case law/areas of law that are relevant to the overall discussion of the day.

Hugh began by discussing defamation law and outlining some of the general challenges faced by claimants due to the structure of law, also referring to the inability of groups affected by harmful press misinformation to bring a defamation action. The exceedingly high costs of bringing defamation actions and the declining role of CFAs were also covered as well as discussion of the law in relation to misuse of private information, harassment and surveillance by the media.

Attention then turned to SLAPPs and the way that they have been weaponised by the media. Hugh explained that the likely outcome of plans for SLAPP reform is that costly defamation cases will become even more expensive.

Lorna presented an in-depth analysis of the Blake and Seymour v Fox case. Blake and Seymour were represented by Lorna against Laurence Fox following the false paedophilia allegations made by Mr Fox online. Lorna outlined the importance of the gravity of the allegations, Mr Fox’s substantial Twitter following and the ease of republication that all aided the claimants’ case. Lorna was also able to give a fascinating insight into the procedural nature of bringing such a case.

The Sun Settles

The third panel was a late addition to the agenda following the settlement of Prince Harry and Lord Watson’s case against MGN just a week before the event. Nathan Sparkes (Hacked Off CEO) chaired the panel and was joined by Ellen Gallagher (Hamlins, Lord Watson’s lawyer), Dr Evan Harris(Consultant to Prince Harry’s legal team) and Hardeep Matharu (Byline Times).

We began by hearing from Ellen about the background of the case and a summary of the recent settlement agreements. From her experience working on the case, Ellen was able to provide fascinating commentary on the lengthy saga and Dr Harris supplemented this with his experiences of supporting Prince Harry’s team. Although both were limited on how much they could divulge to the audience, hearing from two people so closely connected to the case was very insightful. Ellen shared that when attending pre-trial discussion NGN’s lawyers seemed surprised at their willingness to take this case to trial.

The conversation then turned to the future and what lies next regarding criminal action, and the role of political reform alongside legal action to enact long-term change. Hardeep shared that in the House of Commons lobby following the ruling a Byline reporter was the only one to ask a question relating to press reform. Hardeep explained that this is typical of a “closed shop’ of journalists who want to downplay the role of the media in political discourse.

The conversation finished with a powerful comparison from Dr Harris who asked why the Government are happy to rely on the defence that these issues are in the past regarding press regulation and the change of Leveson 2, but the same argument doesn’t apply to issues such as the Hillsborough disaster or the post office scandal.

‍

The conference ended with a special "in conversation" discussion with actor Jason Watkins and PJP Trustee Chris Jefferies. You can read our report of their discussion here.