You are still confusing what was an archaic registration system to qualify for cheaper postage with a generalised regime for newspapers. Registration of media always was and continues to be associated with authoritarian regimes and it is employed by governments such as the Chinese Communist Party which is currently using it to suppress dissent in Hong Kong and is being introduced by Orban in Hungary. British governments dating back to the Victorians have been wise to this danger. The two bodies you mention are not statutory bodies and have real bearing on media regulation. The NPA (now the News Media Association) is an industry lobbying group and IPSO is the self-regulatory body of some newspaper groups - basically a formalised complaints procedure which replaced the Press Complaints Commission which was discredited during the phone hacking enquiry. Through the Levenson Commission, the government has attempted to introduce statutory regulation of the press but basically the industry dodged this by setting up IPSO. This means that only effective regulation of media is the law of the land, which is as it should be. It is not the case that there is any difference between online and print - they are subject to the same rules and benefit from the same exemptions in law such as qualified immunity. This broadly means that they can't be sued for libel for a story published in good faith when the subject has been offered the opportunity to respond.  There are no set criteria for qualified immunity but John Dale would benefit from it otherwise I would imagine his site would have been shut down well before this latest outrage. Just as there was never a regime of newspaper registration that controlled who could publish, I don't believe there was ever a golden age of local newspaper journalism. I used to pay my 30p for the Brentford, Chiswick and Isleworth Times when it was a broadsheet. As you admit it was not an outstanding publication and its successors were little better. There were some flashes of good journalistic work that I recall but once non-council advertising started to disappear and the titles survived on public notice revenue, they stopped bothering trying to be interesting to readers. I feel better served in terms of being kept informed by BrentfordTV and BrentfordTW8.com which survive on much thinner resources but maintain journalistic standards just as high and consistently provide balanced and relevant coverage. I believe your contention is totally false. Residents of Brentford are far better informed about local matters than they have ever been and our democracy remains robust or at least it did until John's suspension. Unfortunately your pessimistic analysis may be correct for other parts of the country.

Entire Thread

Topic	Date Posted	Posted By
John Dale suspension and Meta	05/06/25 14:28:00	Jeremy Parkinson
Reply	05/06/25 17:27:00	Ben Halloren
Re:John Dale suspension and Meta	05/06/25 21:39:00	Anne England
Re:Re:John Dale suspension and Meta	06/06/25 10:33:00	Raymond Havelock
Re:Re:Re:John Dale suspension and Meta	06/06/25 14:56:00	Jeremy Parkinson
Re:Re:Re:Re:John Dale suspension and Meta	06/06/25 18:22:00	Guy Lambert
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:John Dale suspension and Meta	10/06/25 10:42:00	Keith Iddon
Re:Re:Re:Re:John Dale suspension and Meta	12/06/25 09:39:00	Raymond Havelock
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:John Dale suspension and Meta	13/06/25 09:14:00	Jeremy Parkinson
Re:Re:John Dale suspension and Meta	10/06/25 09:16:00	Anne England
Re:Re:Re:John Dale suspension and Meta	10/06/25 11:11:00	Steve Bullman
Re:Re:Re:Re:John Dale suspension and Meta	10/06/25 12:05:00	Paul Fisher
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:John Dale suspension and Meta	10/06/25 12:12:00	Steve Bullman
Brentford Today and TV	12/06/25 18:02:00	Joan Adamson
Re:Brentford Today and TV	12/06/25 18:12:00	Joan Adamson
Now who would do that?	13/06/25 12:26:00	Anne England
Re:Now who would do that?	13/06/25 17:25:00	Eric Baker
Re:Re:Now who would do that?	13/06/25 22:55:00	Guy Lambert

Forum Home