AND ANOTHER THING
The Digger visits the Last Chance Saloon and gets a drink on the house
PAUL JOHNSON
The so-called stern rebuke administrat- ed by Rupert Murdoch to his News of the World editor for invading the privacy of Earl and Countess Spencer is humbug. The public should not be taken in by it at all. Indeed, it illustrates perfectly why the pre- sent voluntary system of press discipline is worthless, and why we need a proper priva- cy law of the kind I have now been advocat- ing for many years.
The News of the World's behaviour towards the Spencers, a couple who have done absolutely nothing wrong or dishon- ourable, and who are manifestly in great distress, was as blatant an invasion of priva- cy as you can find. (It has since been com- pounded by the paper's odious stablemate, the Sun, who suborned a homosexual friend of the Spencers in order to print more falsehoods about them.) If a privacy law were on the statute book, the Spencers could have sued successfully in the civil courts. To quote a famous opinion of F.E. Smith KC: 'No defence is possible in this case and the damages must be enormous.' The Spencers might well have been award- ed £1 million — conceivably much more. In the version of the privacy bill I would pre- fer, a special provision would allow the judge, in particularly bad cases, to commit the editor for trial on a charge of criminal invasion of privacy. So Piers Morgan, an impudent Welsh guttersnipe, might well have been jailed. A huge award for dam- ages and a miscreant editor behind bars I cannot imagine any outcome more likely to bring the tabloids' savaging of people's private lives to an abrupt halt.
Instead, what do we have? The new head of the press-backed Complaints Commis- sion is Lord Wakeham, an old lag from the Cabinet with much experience of behind- the-scenes deals. No doubt he, or an inter- mediary, had a word with Rupert Murdoch, to explain to him 'the seriousness of his position'. Murdoch is in need of govern- ment favour at the moment because of impending decisions which will coin him a lot of money and advance him a step nearer his goal of becoming the first global media tycoon. He needs to look like a good boy, and the only way he can think of doing so is to seem to behave like one, just this time. Hence last week's farce. He rebukes Mor- gan, and reports back: 'I have reminded Mr Morgan forcefully of his responsibility to the code to which he as editor — and all our journalists — subscribes.' Never mind that Murdoch's tabloids infringe the code any time they feel like it, without a squeak from their master. For the purpose of this play-acting the code is sacrosanct. So Mor- gan is deeply penitent and is said, courtesy of the News International propaganda machine no doubt, to be 'very upset'.
In fact, Morgan is nothing of the sort. Rebukes cause little concern where he comes from. The editor of a down-market tabloid expects to be rebuked by his propri- etor for publicity purposes. If Murdoch had been genuinely angry or upset he would have sacked Morgan on the spot, or fined him a year's salary. Morgan will not mind a few hard words, especially as he knows they are insincere. And anyway has he not just been commended for his brilliant cheque- book journalism by one of those self- appointed press awards committees which annually dish out accolades, usually on the principle of Buggins's turn? Not that Morgan is safe; and if he thinks so he may be in for a nasty shock. The older he gets, Murdoch, like Henry VIII, enjoys breaking powerful editors even more than he once enjoyed making them. He is Shiva the Destroyer. Look at the pathetic states in which the once almighty Kelvin MacKenzie and Andrew Neil now find themselves. Poor Kelvin has had to take refuge in the Mirror Group, where he takes orders from the sinister David Montgomery, a man he once sacked. As for Andrew, an even sadder case, he is engaged in a convincing demonstration, in the paper where he once lorded it, of how not to write a column. At the moment, Mur- doch is having too much quiet fun in hood- winking the establishment and the public to give Morgan the order of the boot. But his mood may change. So, watch it, boyo!
'If I give it a mention in the House, can I have a free copy?' There is a further important point to make about this affair. Lord Spencer is not exactly a powerful man. But as the brother of the Princess of Wales he has a high pro- file and everyone knows who he is. He and his wife have a received a great deal of pub- licity — and popular sympathy — over the invasion of their privacy. So his was an excellent case for the PCC to engage in a simulated display of muscle, and for Mur- doch to go through the motions of being penitent. But does anyone seriously believe that an ordinary Tom, Dick or Harry — or Sharon or Tracy — who got similarly roughed up by the News of the World would receive the same red carpet treatment from the PCC, or that Murdoch would have bothered to apologise? Of course not. If ever there was a case of one law for the rich — and famous and titled and politically well-connected etc. — and another for the poor, it is the present set- up. If News International invades your privacy, dear reader, you must learn to grin and bear it.
The great merit of the English system of law, both the old Common Law and the statutory law, is that they apply to every- one. Everyone is equal before the law, not just in theory but almost always in practice. That is what the rule of law means. It is not what a quango means. A quango may do an excellent job or it may not. But it can never be relied on, in the way the law can, to dis- pense justice impartially, to make the guilty and powerful tremble and give comfort to the innocent and weak. Quangos are the curse of modern Britain, the perfect formu- la for private deals, behind-the-scenes arrangements, back-scratching, boot-licking and political trading. In the age of the all- powerful and totally unscrupulous down- market tabloid, privacy and its invasion are too important to be left to quangos run by superannuated politician-journalist appointees — no so long ago the editor of the News of the World was one of them! and hand-picked members of the public. Let us have a proper privacy law so that justice can be done and seen to be done, in the clear light of day and in accordance with our traditions. I now have no hopes that John Major, who is pusillanimous, irresolute and shifty, will give us one. Blair is made of sterner, braver and more princi- pled stuff. That is one of many reasons why I shall be happy to see him in Downing Street.
Previous page
