Hugh Grant has always had a weakness for hyperbole, but his claim that Hacked Off saved the press from police spying while editors did nothing is jaw-dropping (The hypocrisy of newspaper bosses and Tory ministers, 23 February). If he actually read the newspapers he’s so ready to criticise, he would know the review of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa) by the interception of communications commissioner, which led to the prime minister’s announcement that police would not be able to access journalists’ phone records without a judge’s permission, was ordered the day after the Mail On Sunday revealed how police had trawled its newsdesk’s phone records in order to identify a confidential source.
Every national newspaper editor (including all of Associated’s) signed the Society of Editors/Press Gazette letter to the prime minister. The Daily Mail has written editorials and articles deploring Ripa. Its editor has attacked it in a speech and, with other executives, has worked remorselessly behind the scenes to convince ministers of its iniquity.
And if Grant still thinks that is “preferring victimhood to change”, I wrote a 2,000-word submission to the Home Office, on behalf of Associated, which argued for exactly the changes now being put in place. And that’s not to mention the detailed and powerful critique submitted on behalf of all editors and publishers by the Media Lawyers Association.
Grant’s damascene conversion to the cause of freedom of expression is of course welcome. But perhaps his next campaign could be against the appalling royal charter, which politicians are trying to impose on all journalists, and the oppressive, discriminatory exemplary damages which will enforce it – both measures backed by statute. Ironically, where Hugh and his chums can justly claim credit is that they really did write the royal charter. Indeed it is as a result of their actions that the police and other bodies which should know better think it’s open season to undermine Britain’s free press. That is one of the Leveson’s most depressing legacies.
Peter Wright
Editor emeritus, Associated Newspapers
• It is certainly welcome news that safeguards are being introduced to protect journalists from misguided and excessive use of Ripa. However, Hugh Grant is quite wrong to suggest that editors played no part in persuading government ministers of the need for urgent action on Ripa. Indeed, the opposite is true. Through the efforts of the Society of Editors, which represents its members, and other media organisations, editors of all papers (and their lawyers) played a central role from the outset.
When the act was going through parliament in 2000, we warned that its wording allowed the police and other agencies to use it as a convenient tool for general data-gathering in a wide array of cases. Even education authorities have used it to make checks on parents’ attempts to get their children into good schools. Editors’ efforts to change the act have been maintained ever since. When it was revealed that the police used Ripa to check on journalists’ sources in the so-called Plebgate affair and in the wake of former MP Chris Huhne’s bid to avoid getting points on his licence for a speeding offence, we expressed our concern both publicly and behind the scenes.
At the Society of Editors’ conference last November, we told the culture secretary, Sajid Javid, that journalists are not terrorists or criminals. He accepted that action had to be taken. He said: “Ripa was passed to help with the fight against serious criminal wrongdoing. Not to impede fair and legitimate journalism, no matter how awkward that journalism may be for police officers and local councils.”
Grant’s Hacked Off colleague, the former MP Evan Harris, was there, so must have been aware of editors’ strong feelings. Javid’s sentiments were first expressed by the Society of Editors as long ago as last March at the Press Awards when the Guardian was named newspaper of the year largely as a result of the Snowden revelations. The campaign culminated in a letter to the PM organised by the Society of Editors and Press Gazette and signed by more than 100 editors from across the whole of the media, as well as all national newspaper editors and major broadcasters, including the Guardian and the BBC.
That unprecedented display of unity was met with a positive response from the PM and his colleagues. Nobody understands better than editors the vital importance of press freedom. To suggest otherwise is utterly wrong.
Bob Satchwell
Executive director, Society of Editors