I Agree With Harry

On page 48 of the Conservative Manifesto, is a pledge to discontinue the Leveson process. Along with the governments sabre-rattling about the BBC, it's a very clear signal of how the land lies with a Johnson majority. The press are off the leash.

If I had seen my own mother hounded, smeared and finally driven to her death by the tabloid press, and had witnessed the same thing now starting to happen to my wife, the Tory pledge would set alarm bells ringing all over the house. Johnson's clear majority means that we will have 5 years of whatever press regime this government chooses to champion. Given that, now would be a great time to emigrate, and to find a way to take myself and my family out of the frontline.

I don't think Harry had a choice. It's clear that the media see shredding Megan as both their right and their cash cow, and it's equally clear that the government (strangely silent n this whole episode) aren't going to lift a finger to stop them. If you had a choice, why would you willingly put up with that?

Taking the longer view, the whole royal family needs to rally round and support them. After all, if the tabloid press can't pursue one royal, you can bet your life they'll go looking for another target.

Zelo Street offers a valuable factchecking service on all those so called 'stories', with the help of Byline Investigates. Remember, you can't believe everything  anything you read in the Daily Mail.

update: Buzzfeed have helpfully compiled 20 examples of the medias drip drip character assasination

Leveson on press sexism and soft porn

Update: several dozen MPs have written to the Sun to call for page 3 to be scrapped, as part of the ongoing #nomorepage3 campaign. The Sun are resisting, because they know sex sells. 

Here's a few snippets from the Leveson report, which devotes a section to how women are portrayed in the press (vol 2, p660 ff).

the unfortunate juxtaposition of the article expressing outrage at a satirical programme on paedophilia and an article commenting on a 15 year-old’s breasts exposes a hypocrisy in relation to the sexualisation of young girls and women that is seen beyond the Page 3 tabloids: some have commented on the awkward co-existence of the Daily Mail’s support for “traditional values” with the Mail Online’s “sidebar of shame”. (p663)

The evidence as a whole suggested that there is force in the trenchant views expressed by the groups and organisations who testified to the Inquiry that the Page 3 tabloid press often failed to show consistent respect for the dignity and equality of women generally, and that there was a tendency to sexualise and demean women (p664)

The impact of discriminatory or prejudicial representations of women in the Page 3 tabloids is difficult to  judge. There is credible evidence that it has a broader impact on the perception and role of women in society, and the sexualisation of society generally

these are important and sensitive issues which merit further consideration by any new regulator. What is clearly required is that any such regulator has the power to take complaints from representative women’s groups.  Consideration should also be given to Code amendments which, while protecting freedom of speech and the freedom of the press, would equip that body with the power to intervene in cases of allegedly discriminatory reporting and in so doing reflect the spirit of equalities legislation.

The fleet street trinity of sexism, soft porn and stereotypes are alive and well, and are explored further in this BBC piece. For a particularly rancid example, here's a dreadful Mail article about a vicar who (shock) wore some 'fashionable' clothes, cut and pasted from a piece in the Times at the weekend, plus half an hour reading Twitter, with the usual (my apologies) set of bikini shots in the sidebar, which tells you all you need to know about how the Mail sees women.  Too Liberal nails it.

So if there's any prospect of a regulator who can challenge this kind of garbage, and a change of culture in the press towards treating women as women and not as pieces of meat, then bring it on.