It was three years ago at an employment tribunal hearing in Stratford, east London, that I first got a glimpse of the aggressive bullying nature of News International. The tribunal was hearing the case of Matt Driscoll, a sports reporter on the News of the World, who had been dismissed finally by the company in 2007. However, the process of getting rid of him began two years previously, with warnings. Emails revealed that then NoW editor Andy Coulson wanted to “get shot” of Driscoll “as quickly and cheaply as possible”.
The reporter became ill, but was still subject to a barrage of phone calls, emails and visits to his home insisting he see the company doctor, despite his own GP having said he needed to distance himself from the source of his stress.
Driscoll won the day, with the tribunal declaring there had been “a consistent pattern of bullying behaviour” from senior NoW managers. He was awarded £792,736 in compensation for unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.
The Driscoll case revealed a glimpse of the atmosphere of fear that the newspaper could create among its own employees, let alone among those it regarded as sources for news stories. This unhealthy culture has only recently been fully exposed.
Apparently, Colin Myler, the last editor of the NoW before it was shut down, improved things from the days of hacking, but many will not regret the loss of a newspaper obsessed with salaciousness.
The demise of the News of the World and the wider debate now opening up on the media raises a number of issues. The concern must be that, once again, all journalists will be considered just as bad as one another, just as all politicians and bankers were tarred with the same brush following the MPs’ expenses scandal and the financial meltdown.
But proper and effective investigative journalism has a vital role to play in a democracy. It acts as a check on those holding power and exposes injustices perpetrated against those who are often the weak and vulnerable. The task of journalists ought to be to stand up for the powerless and confront the powerful.
Few media operations have been doing that. How much better would the tabloids be if they focused their investigative skills on corrupt companies or abuses in government, rather than exposing the antics of celebrities?
The tabloids would argue that people don’t want that type of news. They want sensationalism and tittle-tattle – it’s what sells papers. To a significant degree, that is fair comment. It is no use the great British public suddenly becoming prurient about invasions of privacy when they buy tabloid newspapers to read about them. How often have people wondered about the source of the stories they are devouring?
Those newspapers which do the most investigative journalism can only dream of having a circulation as large as The Sun’s. And even those “quality” papers have been drawn down market in recent years. They have seen what sells in the tabloids. So they, too, devote increasing amounts of space to celebrities and gossip, and less to serious reporting.
Perhaps we really do get the press we deserve. Maybe the wrongdoing at News International reflects a society driven by greed and an anything goes mentality. Rupert Murdoch was an enthusiastic supporter of Margaret Thatcher in selling the neo-liberal revolution that shaped our society as it now is. In return, Thatcher helped Murdoch to smash the unions at Wapping.
One reason for the current nature of the British media is the concentration of ownership. A few very large companies and individuals dominate the media. Many owners are hand in glove with the very corporations their papers ought to be investigating. Editors may claim independence, but the slavish way in which they follow the diktats of their owners is nowhere more clearly seen than in the Murdoch empire. Rupert Murdoch decides which political party his newspapers will support at a general election and they do. And he is a Eurosceptic – another view strongly expounded by his papers.
A thorough examination of media ownership is essential. We need more diversity, allowing trust-funded operations to develop. At a time of internet growth and expansion of social networking websites, it is ironic that ownership of the mass media is concentrated in ever fewer hands. We need a plurality of media to be restored and we need to return to the values of good journalism.
Thanks to technological developments, fewer journalists are employed to produce publications and they are increasingly deskbound. The accountants who have such a decisive influence do not understand journalism and the need to build up sources and networks. They think someone not at their desk scanning websites is wasting time. But it is unhealthy for both journalism and society for reporters to be little more than glorified word processors and largely dependent on the public relations industry for what passes as news.
The News International scandal has shown how necessary reform is, but it is vital not to tie journalists’ hands so tightly that it becomes even more difficult to expose wrongdoing.
