Background Reading: The Leveson Inquiry

The Leveson Inquiry has today heard its last submissions of evidence. Lord Leveson and his team will now consider all the evidence and reach their conclusions by the end of the year, whatever they may be. Over 450 witnesses have appeared before the Inquiry, which has examined the ethics and methods of the press, the relationships between news proprietors and politicians, the press and the public. The story has dominated the headlines for the last eight months, questioning chiefs of the Metropolitan police, the heads of News International and other media outlets as well as government ministers and even the PM himself.

To help you understand some of the background to the Inquiry and the practices of the media over the last twenty years, here is a list of titles we think provide excellent material for matters of media ethics and questions about freedom of speech.

In You Can’t Read This Book, the Observer columnist Nick Cohen examines the prevalence of censorship in the media, which is at odds with our perceptions that we live in an age of unrivalled freedom. The Salman Rushdie affair, for example, has made publishers reluctant to release material that might be seen as inflammatory, whilst the strict libel laws and expensive injunctions in England are preventing important stories from being reported.

Nick Davies’ Flat Earth News, which formed part of his testimony to the Leveson Inquiry, is a critique of the commercialism of news, turning journalism into what he calls ‘Churnalism’. This includes an overreliance on the news agencies like Reuters and AP, as well as the influx of PR into articles, all of which lead to a dangerous amount of misinformation in the global news media. His examinations into the development of the ‘Millennium Bug’ fear and the reporting on heroin and the ‘War on Drugs’ are both worth reading.

  

Media Lens is an excellent website which analyses media output and was established by David Cromwell and David Edwards. It aims to highlight examples of omission or bias by members of the British media. Media Lens provides a weekly e-mail Media Alert which alerts readers to examples of media bias or poor reporting in the headlines the previous week.

Tom Watson MP and Martin Hickman wrote Dial M for Murdoch in the aftermath of the hacking scandal and during the Leveson Inquiry testimony. Watson MP was one of the figureheads of the campaign to learn more about the true extent of phone-hacking and was the politician who compared News International to a ‘mafia’ organisation. The book has only recently been released and is probably the most up-to-date account of News International and phone-hacking. Watch Watson in action questioning James Murdoch at a Commons Select Committee:

These books and blogs tend to dwell on the negative aspects of the global media, but this is not true of all media. There are excellent journalists out there, and some of their accounts make for interesting reading. Andrew Marr’s My Trade provides an informative account of the history of British journalism. Jon Snow’s Shooting History or Robert Fisk’s The Great War of Civilisation are both excellent accounts, as is John Pilger’s Investigative Journalism and its Triumphs.

If you wish to read the transcripts from the hearings of the Leveson Inquiry, they are all available on the Inquiry’s website here.

A Guide to the Gay Marriage Debate

Article written by Tom Nash

So what’s the fuss all about?

Currently in the UK, same-sex couples who wish to get married cannot do so legally. There have been increasing efforts by LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transsexual) campaigners to legalise same-sex marriage, and petition the government to change the law. In Scotland the debate has been going on for some time, whilst in the rest of the UK it’s still in its infancy.

Can’t homosexual couples already get married?

No, if you are a gay couple you are allowed to enter into a civil partnership. Those who are in a civil partnership have the same rights as a married, heterosexual couple (such as inheritance rules, tax laws and residence to foreign citizens). However, they are not ‘married’.

So why bother campaigning if you already have the same rights as a married couple? What’s the point?

The point is that if you are a religious couple that believe in God and want to get married in a church, you are unable to do so. Churches are currently not allowed to hold marriage ceremonies if they wish to. Therefore if you want to get married, you are discriminated against because of your sexuality.

But what’s the definition of marriage?

The Oxford English Dictionary defines marriage as, “The formal union between a man and a woman, typically as recognised by law, by which they become husband and wife”. The Bible also states this. In addition, it emphasises that marriage is a pathway to having children and raising a family in God’s name.

So by that definition, two men or two women can’t get married? They would also be unable to naturally have a child, unlike a heterosexual couple?

Yes, but many campaigners argue that the definition given by the Bible is not appropriate in today’s society. Many gay couples can already adopt and raise a ‘family’, if not in a traditional sense. We live in an era that supports homosexuality and encourages inclusivity, and it seems wrong that we are still using an old definition. An alternative, more encompassing definition would be to say that marriage is a union of two people who love each other and wish to spend the rest of their lives supporting each other. This definition would therefore allow gay couples to be married.

Surely you cannot be a Christian if you ignore what the Bible says though?

This is a tough one for Christians, and indeed for every religion. Yet most Christians ignore sections in the Bible that do not seem plausible or relevant. Very few Christians, for example, believe that the earth really was created in seven days by God.  Christian supporters also argue that the main message of Jesus and Christianity itself is one of love and forgiveness. They reason that same-sex marriage is something God would approve of. However, many would argue that there is a line to be drawn. Should Christians not believe that Jesus rose from the dead, because the Bible is an unreliable source? This is why some Christians oppose same-sex marriage, because they believe it strays too far from the Bible’s teachings. But it is a debate still being held to this day.

So if same-sex marriage is legalised, will all churches be forced to comply to the law?

Not at all.  The Scottish and the UK government, as well as campaigning groups, have made it clear that only those religious bodies that wished to introduce the ceremonies would have them. Any church that has a religious objection will not be forced to hold same-sex marriages. However, there is concern amongst some religious figures that both governments will not keep their word.

What’s the view of the Church of England, the Church of Scotland and the Catholic Church?

All oppose gay marriage. Both the Catholic Church and the Church of Scotland have been clear in their disapproval for some time, whilst the Church of England has only recently ruled against supporting the movement. However, there are some in all churches who oppose these views and argue for a change in the law.

So who does support same-sex marriage?

Various groups and people. Church and faith groups include The Humanist Society of Scotland, The Scottish Unitarian Association and the Jewish Gay and Lesbian Group. Celebrities and politicians include Stephen Fry, Daniel Radcliffe, and most recently (and controversially for some Americans), Barack Obama.

What about political parties?

In Scotland all major parties (SNP, Labour, Conservatives and Lib Dems) have pledged their commitment to same-sex marriage.  The SNP’s position is somewhat complex however, as they are funded and supported by many Catholics and out-spoken critics of the proposals.  In the Westminster government, both Labour and the Lib Dems support the proposals. David Cameron proclaimed his support for the movement in 2011, and many influential Tories such as Theresa May have joined him. However, other major figures like Philip Hammond have openly disagreed, and Tory backbenchers are generally unhappy with the idea.

What’s going to happen next?

It’s hard to predict! Polls in Scotland and the UK seem to show that the majority of people agree that it should be legalised. In Scotland the consultation period has ended, so it is now up to the government to announce what will happen. A decision was supposed to have been announced several days ago, but instead the government pushed back the decision until later in the month, leading many to fear that it may be some time before anything happens. The consultation period has also ended in the UK, but it may take some time before any action is taken.

About Tom Nash: I am a 2nd Year History student at the University of Edinburgh. I am also an elected member of Edinburgh University Students' Association (EUSA), and have campaigned for same-sex marriage in the past. Follow me on Twitter: @TomCNash