NEWS RELEASE

DATE: 24 June 2011

THE Government’s recent about-turn on BBC World Service funding is “Too little, too late,” according to the Chartered Institute of Journalists.

The Foreign Secretary, William Hague, this week announced an additional grant of £7m over the next three years, which it’s thought could save the BBC Arabic Service and throw a lifeline to the threatened Hindi network.

Chairman of the CIoJ’s Broadcasting Division, Paul Leighton, welcomed the news, but said it does not end the fight to save hundreds of jobs which are due to be axed in the BBC World Service.

Mr Leighton – an ex-BBC news editor – says that many jobs have already gone with the closure of a number of language services – and there are still more to come.

“It was an intolerable burden to add the costs of the World Service to the BBC budget at a time when money was already tight,” he said.

“It seems the Foreign Secretary has, to some degree at least, accepted that. But this money is no substitute for the grant in aid withdrawn from the World Service by this Government.”

Earlier this month (June) BBC News tabled proposals for widespread cuts to its 8,000 news staff in the UK and abroad, as part of a plan to make annual savings of £89m. The plans also included merging the previously separately-funded BBC World Service with the main news division. It is feared that as many as 1,000 journalists’ jobs may be axed.

The Institute plans to continue to fight further closures and job losses.

ENDS

NEWS RELEASE

Date: 24 May 2011

NEWS that a select committee is to be set up to look into the question of injunctions and super-injunctions has been welcomed by the Chartered Institute of Journalists.

The move was announced in the House of Commons on Monday (May 23) by attorney general Dominic Grieve, in response to a question tabled by John Whittingdale MP, chair of the committee for Culture, Media and Sport.

Mr Whittingdale referred to the case of a famous footballer who it is claimed has taken out such an injunction to prevent the publication of details about his private life.

A Scottish newspaper has identified the footballer but is unlikely to face prosecution since Scottish law differs from that south of the border. The footballer has also been named on social network site Twitter and his identity has become common knowledge. Despite this, the media has been banned from identifying the man and The Sun newspaper was yesterday (Monday 23 May) unsuccessful in its attempt to get the ban overturned.

Mr Whittingdale said in the House: “This is all in danger of making the law look an ass.”

Mr Grieve said the committee would be a joint effort between both Houses of Parliament. Both the justice and culture secretaries would be invited to set up terms of reference for the committee which would be due to report back in the autumn.

Announcing the formation of the committee, Mr Grieve added that it would still be up to the judiciary to decide on individual cases.

Speaking of the discrepancies between the restrictions on the print media and electronic media such as social network sites, Mr Grieve added: “People who believe that modern methods of communication mean they can act with impunity, may well be in for a rude shock.”

He added: “Generally the Press respect injunctions – it is the bloggers and tweeters who are causing a lot of the problems.”

The comments were welcomed this week by the chair of the CIoJ’s professional practices board, Amanda Brodie.

She said: “The Institute welcomes the formation of the new committee which it is hoped will go some way towards regularising the position with regard to injunctions.

“Frankly, the present situation is rapidly descending into farce. Much of this information is already in the public domain and yet print media are being bound by restrictions which social networking sites are ignoring.

“The law is lagging behind in the fast-paced world of electronic media and urgent action to police the situation is long-overdue.

“The Government needs to find a solution that will balance the rights to privacy with the right to freedom of expression and of a free Press – and it needs to do it soon, for all our sakes.”

ENDS

Notes to editors:

Formed in 1884, the Chartered Institute of Journalists (CIoJ) is the world’s oldest established professional body for journalists, and a representative voice of media and communications professionals throughout the UK and the Commonwealth.

NEWS RELEASE

RELEASE DATE: 10 November 2010

Northcliffe is planning a reduction in the number of copy-subs at its production centres. Reporters will be asked to write directly onto pages, being given a pre-set length for the story. This is already the case at two other large media companies, Johnston Press and Archant.

The proposals will lead to a reorganisation of the six production ‘hubs’ which were set up only last year. The production centres, known as ‘hubs’, thought to be most at risk are South West hub at Plymouth, the West Midlands hub at Stoke, and the East Midlands hub in Nottingham.

The CIoJ said: “This is a personal tragedy for every journalist who loses his or her job, but it is much more far-reaching than that. The union views the removal of this vital tier of checks, carried out by sub-editors, to be a serious detriment to the standards of our local newspapers.

“Reporters, who are already working hard to produce copy for print, on-line and video platforms, are now being expected to sub-edit their own copy as well. Headline writing is a skill in itself, yet reporters are being asked to perform this task too, often with little or no training.

“Clearly this can only lead to more errors creeping into stories, lowering the standards which readers have rightly come to expect from their local Press.

“We are aware of the need to make economies in these difficult times, but it is likely that the loss of a whole raft of experienced journalists like this will prove to be a false economy.

“Advertisers and readers alike may well lose confidence in newspapers as a result of this lowering of standards, and this will cost them dear in terms of much-needed revenue.

“Managers also need to factor-in the cost of expensive legal fees due to more mistakes getting into print, which may end up in court.”

“So many senior journalists are either being made redundant or walking out after seeing what is happening to their papers, that we are now seeing a serious drain in talent and experience in our profession. This leeching of expertise can only weaken the newspapers they leave behind. It will have serious consequences for the companies themselves, who will soon find it impossible to recruit staff of the calibre they require.”

NEWS RELEASE

RELEASE TIME: 20 October 2010, 9.00am

Institute of Journalists Calls on Nelson Mandela to resist legislation

THE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF JOURNALISTS has appealed directly to Nelson Mandela in an effort to stop Draft legislation to control and censor the media in South Africa, reminiscent of apartheid-era laws.

Following a formal letter to South African President Jacob Zuma, the President of the CIoJ, Liz Justice, and the Chairman of the CIoJ’s International Division, Alun Hill, have asked the former president to use his influence to halt this potential disaster in its tracks.

“Nelson Mandela knows more than most, the true cost of trying to remove this type of censorship once it has taken hold in government,” said Justice. “It is our hope that he will use his considerable influence to help the South African government see sense before it is too late.”

“The only people who have reason to fear the media,” said Hill, “are those who are incompetent, corrupt, dishonest, or do things that are against the interests of the country. Politicians who are honest and work in the best interests of the country have nothing to fear.”

Hill continued: “The reputation of the media in South Africa in the years since the fall of apartheid has been very good. It is now one of the more free and best in Africa. It would be a shame and a big mistake to reintroduce press censorship and controls similar to those of the apartheid era that would make it much more difficult for the media to keep the people of South Africa informed about what is going on in the country.”

The Institute is objecting to two proposed measures, the Protection of Information Bill and a Media Appeals Tribunal. The bill makes it much easier for South African ministers to classify measures and activities as secret or confidential, and it provides for severe penalties – up to 25 years in jail – for journalists or anyone else publishing information about measures or activities that have been classified.

The Media Appeals Tribunal would replace the Press Council and Press Ombudsman to decide what the media can and cannot publish. The present system, which many say works well, is an independent system run by the media and forcing publications to publish large corrections if something they print was untrue or misleading. Members of the ANC, the majority party in South Africa, some of whom have been criticised by the media, want a Media Appeals Tribunal under Parliament’s control to take over the powers of deciding what the media can or cannot publish and what punishment should be given to publications found guilty of printing untrue or misleading information. The Tribunal would be appointed by Parliament and have to report regularly to Parliament.

Ends+

Notes to editors:

Formed in 1884, the Chartered Institute of Journalists (CIoJ) is the world’s oldest established professional body for journalists, and a representative voice of media and communications professionals throughout the UK and the Commonwealth.

It has members in South Africa and an interest in the interests of journalists worldwide.