Did the PCC fail when it came to phone hacking?

Many within the press have argued that the Leveson Inquiry is unfortunate and unnecessary, a political distraction partly designed to divert attention from politicians’ links with News International, and a threat to press freedom. They also argue that self-regulation was not to blame for the phone hacking scandal: it was a failure of law, not the Press Complaints Commission.

This pamphlet argues that those claiming the PCC did not fail in the case of phone hacking are wrong. It will show how, although its defenders are justified in saying it did not have the remit or the resources to deal with the scandal, it still failed: by claiming responsibility for regulating newsgathering without the resources or the powers to do so; by giving the deliberate and misleading impression that it was investigating phone hacking and associated problems; and by claiming there were no serious problems and no signs of malpractice beyond one rogue reporter, without having any evidence to show whether there were or were not.

This forms part of the MST’s submission to the Leveson Inquiry.