Newspaper editors say self-regulation is raising standards

Standards in journalism have been improved by self-regulated codes of practice which are a better way of controlling the press than the law, the Society of Editors told MPs investigating privacy and media intrusion.

The society said a code of practice, which was now part of most journalists' employment contracts, and the Press Complaints Commission (PCC), which replaced the Press Council in 1991, were a swift and inexpensive way for the public to raise grievances.

In a detailed submission yesterday to the Commons Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport, the society insisted that the system was "effective, efficient and accessible to ordinary people".

The society, which represents more than 400 members in newspapers and broadcasting, accepted there should be some restrictions in reporting – such as in courts – but said these needed to be properly justified and kept to a minimum. Any fundamental change to current practice would be a backward step for the public and the industry, it said.

"The code has succeeded in raising standards, because it provides a clear statement of both principle and practice," the society said.

"It is especially helpful because it enables prompt response without the need to resort to expensive legal advice." A majority of lay members on the PCC maintained fair play for the public, the society said, and newspapers and magazines took critical adjudications very seriously.

"Suggestions of what might be perceived to be more powerful sanctions are inappropriate and would undermine rather than enhance the complaints system," it said. "Financial penalties would inevitably bring in expensive lawyers and delay the process."

The society argued that penalties could only deal with transgressions, whereas the whole point of the code was to prevent invasions of privacy and other offences rather than merely to punish them: "The law punishes murder or burglary, but it does not stop it."

Allegations of media intrusion tended to hit the headlines when they came from famous people, but more than 90 per cent of complaints were from "ordinary people", it added. "The evidence is that those so-called ordinary people seem satisfied with the system."

The committee is examining the PCC's role and will look at similar arrangements for broadcasters. It will consider the case for privacy laws and whether a statutory ombudsman should replace the PCC.