On press freedom

I selected the pseudonym "Pelagius" in tribute to the notable "opponent of St Augustine" who was executed by the early church for the heresy of suggesting that it was not necessary to require the services of a "middle man" ie a priest, in order to have direct communion with God. Naturally this was anathema to the church, so he was killed for it. Ever since the name Pelagius has become synonymous with freedom of speech and individuality.

Hence I have deep reservations about any formal vetting of the press. But freedom of speech has its limits. As Oliver Wendel Holmes said, freedom of speech does not extend to shouting fire in a crowded theatre. And there should be other limits too. When the McCanns lost their daughter Maddie, they experienced one of the worst tragedies known to a human being. I should know: I lost my own son 6 years ago and the pain and suffering from that event endure as brightly today as it did then. But even my tragedy pales besides the abduction of a child. Even so, the Daily and Sunday Express thought nothing of conducting a serious and extended campaign suggesting that the parents were responsible for the death of their child- this despite any real evidence coming to light whatsoever. The McCanns eventually had their day in court, and were handsomely compensated for the disgraceful libel they had suffered.  But the McCanns are both doctors, and therefore able to mount an expensive campaign to win justice.

My view is that a special "Assistance Board" should be established to help people who have suffered at the hands of the media to get their "redress". Grants could be made to pay for the best lawyers around, which is fair enough. The press, with its very deep pockets, can afford the best, so why not the "victims"? We don't need any press regulation, but we are entitled to fight back if our reputations are trashed in the media, and a compassionate state should put the machinery in place to enable everyone to do just that, should it ever become necessary