Australia: Google urges rejection of web regulation

Google has urged the Australian federal government to reject an interim independent report recommending the country’s internet be regulated in a similar manner to television, arguing it would be unclear how regulation online could be imposed without a filter. Its proposals, if successful, would usher in a “new independent regulator for content and communications” that is technology-neutral. Google said it was “struggling with the one-size-fits-all model” the proposals made in the report, which is related to part of Australia’s Convergence Review into determining if current media policy and regulation need amending.

Sun editor calls for "level playing field" between print and online

Th editor of the Sun has called for a “level playing field” between the press and the internet at the Leveson Inquiry today.

Dominic Mohan, who joined the paper in 1996 and has been its editor since 2009, said the combination of an over-regulated press with an unregulated internet was a “very, very worrying thought”.

Mohan said that at the moment, “it feels like every story has to be considered in terms of the Bribery Act, privacy, the PCC.” He added that statutory regulation filled him with “fear” and revealed that he had had discussions with a senior executive at the paper over appointing an ombudsman to deal with readers’ complaints. He said it could be “useful in terms of self-regulation”.

Mohan said the Inquiry itself may have made him more cautious about publishing certain stories. He reiterated that he had “seen mistakes made” at the tabloid and was keen to learn from them. He said his staff will be advised on language use regarding issues such as HIV/AIDS, gypsies and travellers later this year.

He added that, since the Press Complain Commission’s adjudication on a story by the Sun about singer Charlotte Church‘s pregnancy — published before Mohan became editor — he has “not run stories on females under 12 weeks pregnant”.

A new system on paying sources requiring four signatures from managers was instituted in September 2011, which Mohan called “sensible” and “good governance” following the closure of the News of the World after phone hacking revelations.

Earlier in the day, The Sun’s head of legal called prior notification “absolutely correct journalism”, adding that it can go some way in avoiding libel by informing “the other side” of a story before publication.

Justin Walford told the Leveson Inquiry he could not recall an occasion when it was in the public interest to not inform someone of a story involving them.

Ex-Formula One boss Max Mosley, who sued the News of the World for breach of privacy in 2008, has also championed the cause. Yet he lost his bid impose a legal duty of prior notification last May, with the European Court of Human Rights ruling that such a system would have a ”chilling effect” on the press.

Walford described his own role at the tabloid as “risk assessment”, noting that he would deal with legal issues in the following day’s paper, but that it was the editor who would make the ultimate decision of whether running a certain story would be worth the risk.

The hearing continues tomorrow, with evidence from editors of the FT, the Independent and the Telegraph.

Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson