Equally, regulation has to be removed from the iron grip of press barons who have financed and dominated the current Press Complaints Commission, the existing oversight body. The PCC has done some good things, but it lacked the power or the willingness to combat the industry’s worst practices. No-one trusts a tabloid editor to guard himself anymore.
同样,我们也不能让监管权继续掌握在那些资讯大亨手中。这些人资助并主导了目前的资讯监管机构——英国媒体投诉委员会(Press Complaints Commission)。英国媒体投诉委员会办过一些好事,但是它没有权力、也没有意愿去与资讯业内最丑恶的行为做斗争。没人会再相信一份小报的主编能够自我监督。
It must be voluntary because forcing all organisations to submit to a regulatory body is akin to state licensing. If any government levied swingeing fines on a media outlet that chose to set its own standards within the law – the stance taken by The New York Times in the US – it would create martyrs.
要保障自愿性原则是因为,强迫所有机构顺从一家监管机构,这种制度非常接近政府许可证制度。如果有政府对试图在不违法的前提下建立自己标准的媒体(比如美国《纽约时报》(The New York Times))征收巨额罚款,那么该媒体将成为制度的牺牲品。
A voluntary approach would also allow any publisher, large or small, online or in print, to place itself within the regulated framework. Compulsion would involve the new body picking and choosing among publishers. That raises all kinds of problems in a world of fracturing media, where all kinds of groups and individuals can publish.
【英国应重写资讯自由】相关文章:
★ 懒汉海利
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15