A new report from the Press Recognition Panel, launched today, provides factual analysis demonstrating that the lack of independent and meaningful press regulation in the UK persists, over ten years since the conclusion of the high-profile Leveson Inquiry, leaving the British public as unprotected as ever from potential press harms.
A Review of the Independent Press Standards Organisation’s Complaints Process and Related Issues
In debates surrounding the Media Bill, the government has stated on a number of occasions that the existence of the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) as the regulator of large sections of the UK press has removed the need for the measures to ensure independent press regulation that Parliament voted for following the Leveson Inquiry.
And yet, a comprehensive review of available data demonstrates that IPSO is not a fully operating regulator of the UK press. The report outlines how:
- In the five years 2018 to 2022, even after excluding third-party complaints and clearly out-of-scope complaints, IPSO investigated 3.82% and upheld 0.56% of the remaining complaints it received.
- Like its predecessor, the PCC (Press Complaints Commission), IPSO has never issued a fine against a publication, launched a standards investigation or imposed significant sanctions on any publishers, even in those cases where the public interest may seem to require it.
- IPSO’s last published expenditure is no larger than the PCC’s when inflation is taken into account, likely perpetuating the inequality of arms between an individual complainant (who relies heavily on support from the IPSO team) and a large publication with a legal team.
- Despite IPSO having a larger volume of complaints than its predecessor, the PCC, the number of staff working in the complaints team at IPSO (seven) is no higher than it was under the PCC.
Kathryn Cearns OBE, Chair of the Press Recognition Panel (PRP), says:
“This report provides clear evidence that certain Parliamentarians have made unfounded and incorrect statements about the UK’s largest print press complaints body, the Independent Press Standards Organisation, as part of a misleading campaign to quickly repeal Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013.
“A repeal of Section 40 will be devastating for the public in the UK, where harm by the press is still inflicted far too often on ordinary members of the public. The public could lose its only viable route – were it properly commenced – to challenging the UK press and news publishers without incurring huge costs. In addition, it will denigrate freedom of speech in the UK.
“The aim of Section 40 is to protect the public from harmful press practices and encourage news publishers to sign up to an approved regulator – so that we finally have meaningful and independent regulation of the press in the UK. However, it also protects freedom of speech by preventing wealthy individuals and organisations from trying to stifle investigative journalism by misusing the courts to bury journalists in legal costs.”
