面对这种对资讯业的干预,任何记者(或任何受影响的公民)肯定会本能地反对。正如首席法官(Lord Chief Justice,司法体系的首脑)去年所说:“我们有时认为是理所当然的那些自由权利,我们能否继续行使、甚至这些权利能否继续存在,都有赖于司法独立以及媒体独立。
Sadly, it may be too late. The odious behaviour of journalists employed by Mr Murdoch and Richard Desmond, owner of the Daily Express and Daily Star, which repeatedly implied that the parents of a missing child were involved in her kidnap, has provoked such outrage that self-regulation has been discredited. Time has been called in the last chance saloon.
不幸的是,一切或许已经太迟。默多克和理查德·德斯蒙德(Richard Desmond)旗下一些记者的劣行已激起民愤,人们已经不相信媒体能够自律了——最后一点耐心也已经耗荆德斯蒙德旗下的《每日快报》(Daily Express)和《每日星报》(Daily Star)曾反复暗示一名失踪儿童的父母与绑架案有关。
But things are not as parlous as they sound. The UK could use this chance to enshrine in its constitution an approach to the press that curbs abuses of power while enhancing, rather than limiting, its freedoms. There are many traps but a decent outcome is possible.
不过事情其实并没有听上去那么危险。英国可以利用这个机会设计一种机制,既限制资讯业滥用自由,又增强(而非限制)资讯业的自由,并将这种机制写入宪法。这个设计过程可能会遇到很多陷阱,但产生一个不错的结果是可能的。
【英国应重写资讯自由】相关文章:
★ 懒汉海利
★ 小红帽
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15