Sleep walking into supranational totalitarianism.
EU-wide mega-Leveson 'needed' to silence Press, bloggers
A group reporting to the European Commission has recommended the regulation of the media and bloggers. It also called for the creation of several new regulatory apparatus for fining, monitoring and chivvying the Press. The tiny team - two law experts and "new media" attention-seeker Ben Hammersley - are billed as the "High- …
-
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 12:10 GMT The BigYin
Re: I'm not one to post general abuse...
You don't need to prove anything if stating an opinion. So long as you don't stray into hate-speech or incitement of some.
"Les Miserables was a bad movie"
HALT CITIZEN! TO HOW MANY DECIMAL PLACES WAS LES MISERABLES A BAD MOVIE?
"Err...what?"
Not going to happen.
-
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 14:45 GMT The BigYin
Re: I'm not one to post general abuse...
Well what I meant (as per my example) was a simple opinion. I thought Les Mes was poor. I don't really have to justify it beyond "I didn't like it". It's not defamatory at all, nor should I be prevented from stating it.
And yes, I am aware that the criteria for "hate speech" could be stretched to cover just about anything. But it's not like we are going to have to back-up every single little thing we say with verifiable facts; is it? And even facts can be open to interpretation.
For the avoidance of doubt: I don't like the proposal and I think the UK already has more than enough laws to cover defamation, libel etc. And the international tourism we are seeing in our courts is testament to that.
-
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 17:19 GMT Heathroi
Re: I'm not one to post general abuse...
well, that was the point of the law, it protected cads generally up to no good, making their detractors prove they were up to no good and since that could BE problematic, it would put the cads in the clear. In your case, people would say "Neil? pedo? that doesn't sound right' ( i'm assuming ;-) but "Tony Blair? (or 'Dave' Cameron) murderous sleazeball? yeah that sounds right' allowing people to believe anything about them and making sure they disappear much quicker from public office.
-
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 11:04 GMT Return To Sender
Unusually blatant...
for the EU. Normally you have to really dig in to the fine print to work out what the scam is. This time they're outright asking to create a money trough to get some snouts into.
I'm never quite sure where I stand on the EU, it's got good bits and bad bits like everything else. Stuff like this doesn't, in my opinion anyway, help to enhance its reputation.
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 17:24 GMT Spoonsinger
Re: Unusually blatant...
Up'd you. So now waiting for the knock on the door.
ps
It was sold as a 'common market' here, but has morphed into something somewhat weirder. Shall be interesting to see how things turn out - in the whole 'may you live in interesting times' type way. Sit back and watch is my philosophy - which probably makes me part of the problem.
-
-
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 14:51 GMT Toltec
Re: So much for the referendum
" Media councils should have real enforcement powers, such as the imposition of fines, orders for printed or broadcast apologies, or removal of journalistic status.
But wait, who exactly is a journalist? The group doesn't even know - and doesn't want to say. Or as it puts it:
Within the shifting sands of the current media environment, the HLG regrets to refrain from offering any firm and consensual definition of either journalism or journalists."
Looks clear to me, a journalist is someone with a journalistic status that can be removed.
If you do not think of your self as a journalist then removing this status is a little like excommunicating an atheist.
-
-
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 11:04 GMT Anonymous Coward
SCART
Obviously this will all culminate in SCART sockets being fitted to all EU citizens so that they can be networked and dominated.
And I don't even mean RGB SCART, I mean the proper French SCART with French protocols and voltages etc.
Mind you, the next time someone uses this as an example of why David Cameron is talking about leaving the EU to get the UK its freedom back, remind them that it was the EU who forced the UK to stop arresting innocent Brits taking photos in public and harvesting people's DNA...
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 18:00 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: SCART
Given the dna gathering and locking up photographers was inspired by EU proposals I hardly think it's fair to say that the EU was the protagonist in that. They were, at best, making use of the situation for their own ends.
You see, it works like this. A thinktank funded by the EU proposes some new set of regulations, which are then kicked up to a European Council for debate. The idea is floated at the European level as a non-legislative debate, after which the national parliaments take the hint and start working on their own implementations. DNA gathering and internet traffic monitoring are two good examples. Parliaments implement these laws haphazardly across the EU, creating a conflicting set of new rules and regulations that vary from country to country.
In the meantime the Council has been quietly working on its own implementation of the same idea, which slowly works its way through varius stages of committee while the member states publically implement their own versions of the same thing. The EU then steps up, declares loudly that these laws are unjust, poorly implemented or just plain bad and that it wants all that faff to stop immediately - everyone cheers and the EU lays claim to the role of protector of the common man. Six months later it announces that it's bringing a new "harmonising" directive forward, which takes all the very worst elements of the national laws and puts them together in a single place.
The directive becomes law. Acts implementing it amend the previous laws to comply with the new harmonised regulation. Regulatory capture brings another aspect of our lives under the aegis of the EU. We lose even the trifling ability we had to prevent such laws coming into being in yet another area, and our politicians, fat on the public purse and with little to do as they no longer run the country in any meaningful sense, begin crafting new and ever more detailed ways of prying into the minutia of the citizen's life and soon find that Personal Occupation Y is the new Problem that Must Be Dealt With.
A thinktank funded by the EU proposes that some new set of regulations be crafted to deal with this.
The cycle begins anew.
-
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 11:28 GMT Shrike
heh
"The democratic legitimacy of the European Union is..."
wait one, there's any sort of legitimacy in a democratic body that has very limited actual influence ?
the power rests almost entirely with the commission, who has members appointed by member states. no member of parliament can actually propose a bill, only the commission can, and that's before touching upon the way the seats are assigned both in the commission and in parliament.
so yea, come back when you got some actual legitimacy to protect eh?
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 11:28 GMT IHateWearingATie
Words fail me.
One just hopes that Steely Neeily chucks the report in the bin.
Unfortunately, this kind of thing can acquire a life of its own within the EU if one or more commissioners picks it up and pushes it.
Full Disclosure - in my short time as a civil servant I had cause to say 'No' to the EU on a particular issue where powers were to be transferred (nothing to do with IT). It felt very good.
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 12:06 GMT Da Weezil
"High-Level Group on Media Freedom and Pluralism" - I really did read that as "Puritanism" at first glance
Life in Europe really is a joyless thing. While I agree the press has demonstrated its seedier side in recent years, do the Eurocrats really believe that democracy is served by this sort of drivel?
There are bigger fish to fry....
-
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 14:45 GMT The Axe
Re: A united Europe is a good idea
You might think that to have a united Europe we need a EU. We don't. Many countries can work together for the same goals but without needing to be so closely tied together. Look at NATO for military cooperation. NAFTA for trade cooperation. The existence of the EU does not make conflict less likely - in fact it makes it more likely. Just look at how Greece is coping with being forced to toe the EU line.
-
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 12:07 GMT Bluenose
Hungary votes to support proposal
Or I imagine they will since they have recently been rebuked by the EU for doing something similar around freedom of the press.
The upside of this is that it is simply a gang of no-marks providing a report and Steely Neelie is not normally someone who accepts such crap when presented to her if she thinks it has the potential to damage democracy. That said of course some of these things are already in place; for example the UK has a body that can fine newspapers or demand they print an apology.
Overall though this document is written by people who have no understanding of the media (its either to make money or promulgate the political views of the owner), ignore the impact such rules would have on democracy and forgot to review it with the idea of how will this be seen by the European Public. The latter point is quite important because if they had thought about this they would have realised that it was a fail from day one.
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 12:10 GMT diodesign
Re: Hungary votes to support proposal
"the UK has a body that can fine newspapers"
Just as a helpful point of order, the PCC doesn't (and can't anyway) fine newspapers because it reckons media barons would treat penalties for inaccuracies as business expenses; it would ruin smaller newspapers; the libel courts are there for making good substantial damage.
C.
-
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 12:12 GMT Anonymous Coward
Not surprising...
I mean; its the same EU which tried to make it illegal for any European household to own an encryption method (key) without the government having a copy to that.
The real problem otoh. is the amount of attention this might receive. Many countries were so interested with the issue of encryption that the attendance record for that particular vote was extremely low. Even though the stakes were quite high where public freedom was concerned; only a few smaller members (iirc Finland) eventually blocked the whole thing alltogether.
So if the "zmartz" politicians are unable to actually read this for what it is then I wouldn't be surprised at all if this would somehow manage to gain some foothold. And the worst part is that I wouldn't even be surprised if the goal isn't even to control the media but merely a sic attempt at getting attention for something "new". Attention but most of all funding to realize or investigate a new project.
I mean; "EU ambassadors" who spend their spare time in 20k/month apartments? (that's in Euro's in case anyone is wondering). While they claim there's a financial crisis the EU sure has a very strange way of showing it I think.
My only hope is that there are enough serious politicians left who are able to see this for what it is.
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 17:19 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Not surprising...
"My only hope is that there are enough serious politicians left who are able to see this for what it is."
Don't hold your breath waiting for serious (or responsible) politicians to arrive
-
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 14:46 GMT Boris the Cockroach
There should be a provision of state funding for media which are essential for pluralism
Thats the line you should be scared of
Thats says "In country A, a member of the EU, all the political parties,the press and population are against further membership of the EU, therefore we can fund a pro-EU media campaign in country A in the name of pluralism"
Perhaps some nice nazi type parties should apply for funding under this idea... "hey.. its pluralism "
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 14:46 GMT JohnG
Linguistic, cultural and political pluralism?
"There should be a provision of state funding for media which are essential for pluralism (including geographical, linguistic, cultural and political pluralism), but are not commercially viable. The state should intervene whenever there is a market failure leading to the under-provision of pluralism, which should be considered as a key public good."
As the panel is chaired by the former president of Latvia, I guess they will start by encouraging participation of Russian speakers and other Slavs in Latvia and other Baltic states, as opposed to the racist discrimination currently allowed by the Latvian Nationality Act.
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 14:50 GMT John G Imrie
Sky v's BBC
There should be a provision of state funding for media which are essential for pluralism (including geographical, linguistic, cultural and political pluralism), but are not commercially viable. The state should intervene whenever there is a market failure leading to the under-provision of pluralism, which should be considered as a key public good.
You could read the above to say that the government can fund the BBC and Sky can go take a running jump.
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 14:50 GMT Tom 13
In a perfect world if one is slandered or libeled
there ought to be a recourse through the courts by which one can reclaim their honor. Too many so called journalists, bloggers, and especially commenters are all to quick to commit precisely these offenses.
The problem of course is that it isn't a perfect world and any tool by which an honest citizen can try to reclaim his honor is also available for abuse from those with none. So on balance the system we have seems preferential to the proposed improvements.
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 14:51 GMT Ken Hagan
Good news for the Guardian?
I think you mis-spelled "BBC". That's by far and away the most obvious model for a broadcaster or news organisation that enjoys public subsidy on the grounds that it provides pluralism and public service.
The failure to even try to define journalist or journalism means we can ignore the parts about enforcement and regulation. (Presumably they were asked to consider such things as part of their remit. It seems rather odd to even bring up the subject, otherwise.)
So all this report has really done is give the BBC a vote of approval and suggested that we could use a few more organisations like that. Hardly controversial, unless you're a Rupert.
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 14:51 GMT Edward Clarke
clarke@cilia.org
It looks like they are recommending a censorship board to punish people who disagree with governmental positions and a propaganda board to publicize things that they like. I believe that the Germans may have complete records in their archives from the old East German government on how to set these up. If not, perhaps they can get some pointers from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Oh, yeah - the proper term is "attention-whore" not "attention-seeker".
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 14:53 GMT TeeCee
EU regulation.
I take it this would be similar to previous EU run ins with the free press, which seem to revolve around articles penned on shady practices at the EU resulting in the journo having his door kicked in by Eurojust and all his source material seized.
Stalin would be proud of them.
It puzzles me that there are still those who continue to deny that the EU is intent on becoming a totalitarian oligarchy when they're being so ruddy blatant about it.
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 14:53 GMT oldredlion
This article is crap
What exactly is wrong with this?
All EU countries should have independent media councils. Media councils should have real enforcement powers, such as the imposition of fines, orders for printed or broadcast apologies, or removal of journalistic status.
I hope El Reg aint going the way of the Sun...
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 14:54 GMT ForthIsNotDead
Wow!
From the EU report:
"Recommendation: In order to build up cadres of professional journalists competent to operate in
a rapidly changing media landscape, or to offer them the possibility to do investigative
journalism, journalistic fellowships should be offered to both entry-level and and mid-career
candidates who could take leave from their media organisations. Universities and research
centres should set up positions for journalists in residence under such fellowships ***to be funded
by the EU***. The selection of the journalists would be done by the academic and scientific
institutions themselves. The fellowships would be particularly valuable for investigative
journalism, or for training journalists to mediate between complex subjects such as science,
technology, finance or medicine and the wider public.
So, the EU want to send journalists to an EU funded "journalism school". With the candidates selected by the (left wing communist) universities themselves.
They just come right out and say it now, don't they?
"Ah! Welcome, comrade to your first day of thought-re-alignment and EU indoctrination."
"Eh? I thought this was a journalism course?"
"Yes, it is. Come in. Sit down. Make yourself comfortable. Mwhua ha ha ha ha ha ha ha"
-
Wednesday 23rd January 2013 14:56 GMT Marksman
Economically Viable?
It is just great that they suggest adding money to the media manipulation. So taxpayers bailout news sources that cannot get people to read their garbage? Probably only those media outlets that agree with the "party." I should start a newspaper that prints one copy, says what the state wants it to say and pays me a salary of 1 million euros a year. Since I am losing money, the citizens should bail me out.
-