The Leveson enquiry

So far I have not commented much on that Leveson enquiry, but now it seems obvious that this enquiry deals mainly with the domestic aspect of journalism and the direct effect that the media has on the private lives of the people the press considers are public property.

I miss however the hard-hitting facts of public opinion making, what effect press reporting has on that. Politically the whole mood of a country can be influenced by toned reporting. Often enough we only find out decades later how any publicity deceived its readers.

The Leveson enquiry doesn’t seem to deal with obvious press deceptions. As long as these deceptions work in favour of the British political interest the enquiry doesn’t want to touch upon it. Of course it is noble of the enquiry to call people like Guido Fawkes who openly admits that he cares very little about publishing restrictions in the UK because he uses international servers and it would be too much work for anybody to actually sue him successfully.Just to mention here that Fawkes tried to provoke me to sue him by sending me a fax in which he invited me to sue him, knowing that it would be a fruitless undertaking.

Of course the blight on the live of celebs is important for them because their private lives are constantly tainted by the Paparazzi but that is really only one aspect of publishing. There is the much more important political opinion making publishing machinery that introduces politics per stealth into our lives on a daily basis. The Freedom of Expression is responsible for allowing to introduce into our minds whole concepts of political endeavour that we have to digest without even realising what is happening to us.

Again lets just re-call in the German case we were  and still are made to belief that a group or several groups of mentally ill ex-mental patients formed into criminal groups and, whilst totally underweight and skinny,they handled heavy machine gun type weapons and organised in terror cells.

It is too obviously ridiculous to make sense that people who hardly weigh enough to wear their own clothes, should be fit enough to handle heavy weapons. Look at all the pictures of armed police officers in the media today, you can see, they are all physically strong to even just stand around and hold those weapons but in the case of the German publishing machinery we are led to belief that crazy people, who were terribly underweight carried out robberies with heavy weapons?

Leveson never asked me to testify how the German magazine Der Spiegel tried to pay me thousands to be able to continue on a false story about Baader-Meinhof. Why doesn’t he show it is possible for publishers today to print lies as long as they have the copyright consent of the persons within those stories.

Leveson never asks how it is possible that a sitting High Court judge can assume the actions of German police officers over 30 years ago when the Germans themselves have already shredded all files about the era. The Leveson enquiry never looks into the historical truth of publications today as long as they suit some obscure British political interest.

And those British political interests today are strongly interwoven with some German political tendencies as Merkel and Cameron  have some very equally wacky ideas. Whilst Germany wants to repress the rest of Europe into austerity, Cameron plays his part here in the UK to put us all into misery about it too.

We have seen how political propaganda can obscure facts and shield human rights abuses. Unfortunately the Leveson enquiry only focuses on the popular press and that is all it is good for.

There are no easy answers and no standard questions because the focus of politics  has changed completely. But Leveson completely forgets to question how ideas are sold to the public and how those ideas conceal the basic facts of what is behind those ideas.

Leveson does not emphasize why publishers do not have to declare why they publish something, what the purpose of some storyline is. Publishers are not forced to explain what they try to obtain by putting stories. They repeat what they are told to report by political parties but have no obligation to make historical comparisons. We are being presented with modern politics as if everything they tell us has no sinister reasons.

We are constantly told that everything abroad that happens in countries like Syria is bad but our own riots were not dissimilar to the situation that is happening in Syria today but the press is able to tell us that the attempts of the Syrian government to stop their riots are criminal but what would have happened if the police had not been able here in the UK to stop the riots when they did?  It was publicised that the police here in the UK would have had the right to shoot at rioters, which is what police does in Syria because things have gone completely out of hand.

We are constantly told how other countries abuse human rights, but here in the UK, we are told that the same human rights abuses are lawful and necessary.

Our right for religion is being criminalised for instance. Yet Leveson has not looked into the powerful changes press reporting can achieve, it merely scratches the surface of publicity.

Comments are closed.

Blog Stats

  • 55,047 hits
%d bloggers like this: