Hacked Off, the campaign for a free and accountable press, is today launching a new initiative to demonstrate that self-regulation under the Royal Charter is in the best interests of news publishers and that membership of a body proposed by the parts of the industry is not.A booklet (downloadable via PDF) is being sent to regional and local newspaper companies showing that they will be better off financially and in terms of risk, and their journalists will enjoy more freedom if they follow the Charter route of self-regulation.In contrast, they would be worse off, would have less influence over their own affairs and would be more vulnerable to meddling by politicians if they joined the IPSO regulator proposed by News UK, Associated Newspapers and the Telegraph Group.The Royal Charter has been the subject of relentless negative propaganda by some national newspapers, yet it remains the only system which enjoys the confidence of the public, the support of victims of press abuse and the backing of all parties in parliament.The booklet, which is being published in the week of the first anniversary of the Leveson Report, is an attempt to redress the balance by pointing out where the local and regional press stand to benefit if they join the royal chartered system, and where they will lose out if they instead choose IPSO.The report also explains how previous concerns raised by the local and regional press about a possible ‘flood of claims’ have been taken into account in the approved version of the charter, and asserts that a regulator capable of recognition under the charter criteria will be established.In a letter accompanying the guide, sent to chief executives of all local and regional newspaper groups, the chair of Hacked Off, Hugh Tomlinson QC writes:

“I want to make you aware of the serious disadvantages of IPSO membership for smaller publishers.“Under IPSO, you will surrender control to larger publishers, because it is structurally biased against smaller publishers.“You will pay more because there is no “polluter pays” principle.“You cannot leave for six years - regardless of any rule, fee, or code changes.“You are more likely to be fined than well-resourced publishers as they will be better able to thwart investigations. And you won’t benefit from costs protections in court because you will have denied litigants the option to access arbitration.“In any case, IPSO will not command public trust, which is essential for all functioning regulators.” Read extracts from the booklet below or view the full report via this link 1846-1_HACKED_REPORT_Final.

The case in brief: Advantages of the Royal Charter· It gives news publishers unprecedented protections from political interference and from bullying by powerful litigants.· It should reduce regulatory costs for news publishers such as theregionals and locals that have a good record of abiding by the law and bythe industry standards code.· It substantially reduces the financial risk to news publishers associated with libel, breach of privacy and other civil law claims.· It gives regional and local newspapers the opportunity and influence to help shape the new system in ways that will suit them.· It is the only chance for news publishers to repair damaged public trust by showing they have no fear of being held to the standards the public expects.The Royal Charter is good for the bottom line· There is no reason to believe that a new self-regulator will be more expensive, and if the ‘polluter pays’ principle is applied regional and local publishers should end up paying much less.· News publishers in the scheme will benefit from lower legal costs and risks thanks to arbitration, and almost certainly lower insurance premiums.· Arbitration under the Charter should dramatically reduce legal costs and risk for news publishers that join a recognised self-regulator.·· Since risk is reduced, the premiums which publishers pay for insurance against libel, privacy should fall as well as and other civil costs and damages.·· The overall cost of the self-regulator need not be higher than now, and regionals and locals can negotiate a lower share of it.Disadvantages of joining IPSO· It will not meet the regulatory standards recommended in the Leveson Report, which is the public’s benchmark of trustworthiness.· It will cost regionals and locals more than the PCC while giving them less influence. Voting power in IPSO is fixed in favour of the big national groups, so the voice of regional and local papers will be even weaker than in the PCC.· IPSO’s rules can be changed without the approval of local and regional newspapers.· Its members will suffer a competitive disadvantage in the event of libel and privacy cases, facing even higher expenses in civil actions than they do now, and higher insurance premiums.· Though investigations and fines under IPSO are unlikely, if any publisher is successfully investigated and fined it will almost certainly be a local paper, since the locals do not have the muscle to disrupt the investigative process in the way the big nationals would.· Its members will be exposed to high risk of further scandal and crisis, since IPSO will have almost all the faults that led to the failure of the PCC.· Newspapers joining IPSO are trapped in it for six years, even if (a) another regulator is formed that kick-starts the financial incentives/penalties, or (b) the rules/fees/code are changed.Concerns about ‘a flood of arbitration cases’ have now been addressed· The regional and local press sought a specific change to the Charter to address this concern, and that change was made. They argued that free access to arbitration would encourage unjustified but burdensome claims, so now an amendment to the Royal Charter permits self-regulators to levy a modest administrative access charge on people making claims. This concern has therefore been dealt with.A self-regulator able to gain the incentives of Royal Charter will be created· Several months will pass before the Charter body, the Recognition Panel, is open for business. Until then no self-regulator can be ‘recognised’, the event that will activate the court costs incentives.· However, so compelling are those incentives that it is certain that at least one self-regulator will be set up in that period with the aim of achieving recognition.· Regional and local news publishers may choose to join that body and participate in its creation, or they may wish to set up a self-regulator of their own and seek recognition.