If the US constitution and Karl Marx can agree on a free press, why can't we?

There is now to be one law for Hello! and another for Angling Times. One could imagine Thomas Jefferson shaking his head in utter bafflement

Share

One of the joys of the US constitution is its brevity. With just one sentence in the first amendment – “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press” – they ensured what still remains every American’s birthright. What would the Founding Fathers have thought had they been able to witness Monday’s dismal proceedings in the House of Commons?

First up was David Cameron announcing the draft Royal Charter to create a press regulator. Our monarch no longer holds sway across the Atlantic but here she still reigns supreme, to judge by the Charter’s first sentence: “We by Our Prerogative Royal of Our especial grace, certain knowledge and mere motion do by this Our Charter for Us, Our Heirs and Successors will, ordain and declare as follows: There shall be a body corporate known as the Recognition Panel …”

When the grace and mere motion have worked their magic, this panel will oversee the regulator’s main board. But anyone lacking Her Majesty’s “certain knowledge” may struggle to make sense of the system. There’s a Foundation Group, which will appoint a Regulatory Appointments Panel, which in turn appoints a Complaints Committee. Somewhere in the labyrinth are an Arbitral Arm, a Code Committee and a Standards and Compliance Arm. Why was the Charter so urgently necessary that it had to be hashed together in the early hours of the previous morning over pizza and Kit-Kats? Allow Cameron to explain: “What happened to the Dowlers, the McCanns, Christopher Jefferies and many other innocent people who had never sought the limelight was utterly despicable. It is right that we put in place a new system of press regulation to ensure that such appalling acts can never happen again. We should do that without further delay.”

Unequal before the law

The first of those sentences is unarguably true. The second is illogical tosh. How would the new regulator have prevented the News of the World from furtively and illegally hacking Milly Dowler’s phone? Yet the non-sequitur is continually repeated: it even had an outing in this newspaper’s editorial on Tuesday, which cited “the gross illegalities of phone hacking” as proof that the existing form of self-regulation wasn’t working.

One thing is certain: the new system won’t work either. It is riddled with inconsistencies, as became apparent after Cameron’s statement when the Culture Secretary, Maria Miller, added extra last-minute clauses to the Crime and Courts Bill. These are intended to bully what she calls “relevant publications” into signing up for the new regulator. Any that remain outside – Private Eye, say, or The Spectator – can be stung for “exemplary damages” if they are sued, purely to punish them for opting out of this supposedly voluntary scheme.

To compound the punishment, there is a startling new version of “no win, no fee”. Suppose a Russian oligarch sues Private Eye for libel and the court finds that the article was entirely true and justified. Nevertheless, according to Maria Miller, the Eye would have to pay all the billionaire’s costs as well as its own. The old principle of equality before the law has been casually jettisoned. There is now to be one law for The Independent, another for The Spectator. What is a “relevant publication” anyway? One could imagine Thomas Jefferson shaking his head in utter bafflement as Monday evening’s debate droned on, with Maria Miller solemnly informing the House that Hello! would have to be regulated, whereas Angling Times and Decanter magazine would not. Other exemptions from the new regime include student newspapers, scientific journals and “special interest, hobby and trade titles”. Defining “special interest” alone should keep the courts busy for years.

Most MPs prefaced their remarks this week with a self-congratulatory flourish disguised as high moral principle. As Cameron put it: “I and everyone in the House care deeply about a free press.” Where had I heard that before? I turned to Karl Marx’s first published newspaper article, a withering account of the 1842 debate in the Rhine Provincial Assembly on the freedom of the press. Naturally he criticised those who would keep newspapers shackled – but then, with an exasperated cry of “God save me from my friends!”, he was even more scathing about the self-styled liberals. Opponents of a free press were at least driven by a pathological emotion which lent conviction to their arguments, “whereas the defenders of the press in this Assembly have on the whole no real relation to what they are defending. They have never come to know freedom of the press as a vital need. For them it is a matter of the head, in which the heart plays no part”.

Leveson's inversion

MPs say that they have no wish to gag the press, but few of them care all that passionately about it. Some, indeed, regard themselves as fellow “victims”, along with the Dowlers, because their expenses fiddles were exposed. They can scarcely hide their glee that Fleet Street’s own misconduct has now given them the upper hand in the eternal struggle between the Third and Fourth Estate.

Here, too, I am reminded of Marx, who thought there was nothing wrong with German philosophy that couldn’t be cured by standing it on its head. The state does not rule the people; the people rule the state. God does not make man, man makes God. “The conversion of the subject into the predicate,” he wrote, “and of the predicate into the subject, the exchange of that which determines for that which is determined, is always the most immediate revolution.” How he would have boggled at the reactionary post-Leveson inversion that transforms “the press holds government to account” into “government holds the press to account”.

As for the Founding Fathers, this week’s wretched dégringolade would have left them profoundly relieved that they threw off the British yoke all those years ago. We now have teams of parliamentary draughtsmen wrestling with the meaning of “news-related material” and “relevant publications”; across the Atlantic they make do with the bracing simple clarity of the first amendment.

React Now

Latest stories from i100
Have you tried new the Independent Digital Edition apps?
iJobs Job Widget
iJobs General

Recruitment Genius: Sales Executive - OTE £30,000+

£16000 - £30000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: They are looking for individual...

Recruitment Genius: IT Project Coordinator / Manager

£25000 - £40000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: A Project Coordinator is requir...

Recruitment Genius: Mortgage Advisor - OTE £95,000

£40000 - £95000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: This is an exciting opportunity...

Recruitment Genius: Trainee Vehicle Inspectors / Purchasers

£20000 - £40000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: Trainee Vehicle Inspectors / Pu...

Day In a Page

Read Next
The possibility of Corbyn winning has excited some Conservatives  

Labour leadership: The choice at the heart of the leadership campaign

Jeremy Corbyn
Pablo Iglesias, the leader of Spain’s anti-austerity party Podemos  

Greece debt crisis: Trouble is, if you help the Greeks, everyone will want the same favours

Charlotte McDonald-Gibson Charlotte McDonald-Gibson
Greece debt crisis: EU 'family' needs to forgive rather than punish an impoverished state

EU 'family' needs to forgive rather than punish an impoverished state

An outbreak of malaria in Greece four years ago helps us understand the crisis, says Robert Fisk
Gaza, a year on from Operation Protective Edge: The traumatised kibbutz on Israel's front line, still recovering from last summer's war with Hamas

Gaza, a year on from Operation Protective Edge

The traumatised kibbutz on Israel's front line, still recovering from last summer's war with Hamas
How to survive electrical storms: What are the chances of being hit by lightning?

Heavy weather

What are the chances of being hit by lightning?
World Bodypainting Festival 2015: Bizarre and brilliant photos celebrate 'the body as art'

World Bodypainting Festival 2015

Bizarre and brilliant photos celebrate 'the body as art'
alt-j: A private jet, a Mercury Prize and Latitude headliners

Don't call us nerds

Craig Mclean meets alt-j - the math-folk act who are flying high
How to find gold: The Californian badlands, digging out crevasses and sifting sludge

How to find gold

Steve Boggan finds himself in the Californian badlands, digging out crevasses and sifting sludge
Singing accents: From Herman's Hermits and David Bowie to Alesha Dixon

Not born in the USA

Lay off Alesha Dixon: songs sound better in US accents, even our national anthem
10 best balsamic vinegars

10 best balsamic vinegars

Drizzle it over salad, enjoy it with ciabatta, marinate vegetables, or use it to add depth to a sauce - this versatile staple is a cook's best friend
Wimbledon 2015: Brief glimpses of the old Venus but Williams sisters' epic wars belong to history

Brief glimpses of the old Venus but Williams sisters' epic wars belong to history

Serena dispatched her elder sister 6-4, 6-3 in eight minutes more than an hour
Greece says 'No': A night of huge celebrations in Athens as voters decisively back Tsipras and his anti-austerity stance in historic referendum

Greece referendum

Greeks say 'No' to austerity and plunge Europe into crisis
Ten years after the 7/7 terror attacks, is Britain an altered state?

7/7 bombings anniversary

Ten years after the terror attacks, is Britain an altered state?
Beautiful evening dresses are some of the loveliest Donatella has created

Versace haute couture review

Beautiful evening dresses are some of the loveliest Donatella has ever created
No hope and no jobs, so Gaza's young risk their lives, climb the fence and run for it

No hope and no jobs in Gaza

So the young risk their lives and run for it
Fashion apps: Retailers roll together shopping and social networking for mobile customers

Fashion apps

Retailers roll together shopping and social networking for mobile customers
The Greek referendum exposes a gaping hole at the heart of the European Union – its distinct lack of any genuine popular legitimacy

Gaping hole at the heart of the European Union

Treatment of Greece has shown up a lack of genuine legitimacy