"The risk of a 'two tier' media environment is a particular problem."
Tell me about it. Alas, the Communications Committee of the UK House of Lords has something else in mind in a new report out today...
"This is not a hypothetical worry: the contours of this scenario are already apparent.
If current trends continue, the gap between those consuming professional journalism and those who do not will widen at pace.
There is a realistic possibility of the UK's news environment fracturing irreparably along social, regional and economic lines within the next 5–10 years. The implications for our society and democracy would be grim."
Grim indeed.
Here is where American readers might say - Hey what's this to do with us? Didn't we toss those guys out in 1776?
Well, because these days, according to the report, one of the values in news is that
"...high quality news outlets boost UK soft power.
The BBC, The Mail and The Guardian are among the top US news sites, for example..."
Was that just "UK soft power" they were exercising when they kept referring in the report to "our visit to San Francisco"?
"Media elites"
On the other hand, the report does shed some light on why journalism is so crap now:
"Mr Colvile of the Centre for Policy Studies worried that journalism was becoming a 'prestige profession', as those from wealthier backgrounds could better support themselves through the poorly paid lower ranks.
The NCTJ said '72 per cent of journalists had a parent in one of the three highest occupational groups, compared to 44 percent of all UK workers'.
This in turn may influence the editorial outlook of newsrooms."
But, hey, why not boost more of that "quality news journalism"... DMG Media (Daily Mail, etc...) suggested a good criteria might be to focus on "content produced by recognised news publishers as defined in the Online Safety Act." Not a "recognised news publisher? No boost for you.
A shot heard round the world...
They will be summoned to the United States of America to explain their censorship and threats to American citizens
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 20, 2024
As the report recommends:
"Ofcom should engage with tech platforms at pace to align content moderation policies with Ofcom's broadcasting codes and the duties
contained in the Online Safety Act 2023.Dame Melanie Dawes, CEO of Ofcom, told us that the lack of transparency about how tech platforms' recommender algorithms work remained "one of the biggest challenges" around improving the health of the online media ecosystem. She called for the regulator or vetted researchers to be given access for testing...
Empowering the regulators quickly is necessary and achievable. The Government should give Ofcom the necessary powers to investigate tech firm recommender algorithms and the operations of large language models (LLMs). This will become increasingly important amid concerns about the potential for political influence and bias in LLMs."
Yes, you read that right. Ofcom seeks to control any "potential for political influence" - not just in the United Kingdom, but far beyond its borders and into every tech platform - including those based in the United States.
Oh, and if you think this doesn't apply to you because you are not a tech platform or a news organization think again. Under their proposal, your blog that includes links to news organizations will be reclassified to fall under Ofcom's remit if these totalitarians get their way:
"...We recommend the Government works with Ofcom to set out plans and timelines for capturing online news intermediaries within the scope of the media ownership rules..."
Another problem, according to the report is all the short-form clips being shared around "without context"... Or, as Anna Bateson, CEO of The Guardian Media Group, thought it was getting harder to achieve "that sense of commonality around truth"...
Back to that two-tier...
"Ofcom's senior leadership argued that its approach to impartiality
had been very clear. We struggled to reconcile this with the evidence.Ofcom's approach has sparked accusations of a two-tier system on the
one hand, and of overreaction on the other. This risks dissatisfaction
on all sides. We were reassured that Ofcom is aware of the challenges
and the need to avoid the impression that political sensitivities have
influenced regulatory enforcement...Ofcom must also remain alive to the risk that underserved audiences may migrate online or switch off altogether..."
On disinformation...
"The Government's policy approach to disinformation is largely led by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. Delivery includes work from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office; Ministry of Defence; Home Office, Cabinet Office; and the security and intelligence agencies, among others.
Activities in recent years include new foreign interference offences under the National Security Act 2023 and some limited offences under the Online Safety Act 2023; national security communications campaigns; monitoring and coordination units; research programmes; tech platform engagements; media literacy programmes; and international initiatives through Five Eyes, the G7, NATO, the EU and an extensive range of other groupings. (emphasis added)"
I'm with JD Vance. It's time to pull out of NATO.
The report goes on some more about "imposing criminal sanctions for spreading
certain content" and clarifying what the new 'false communications' offence means in practice".
Do read the whole thing here.
Last week, friends of Mark Steyn rallied together to launch a crowd-fund at GiveSendGo to help meet a daunting and immediate financial demand by the UK courts in connection with Mark's failed effort to stop the death of free speech there.
Yesterday, they reached their goal:
"We did it!! We hit the goal! Thank you so so very much to everyone who shared and donated to help Mark Steyn. I LOVE YOU ALL!
...The censors in the UK aim to make an example of Mark & make others afraid to speak against the narrative—but we're sending a powerful message back to these tyrants: WE ARE NOT AFRAID."
The CEO of the American based GiveSendGo, who was the first to give, has assured all that - unlike the debacle with a different platform and the Canadian truckers - they will not acquiesce to pressure. It is faith based and there are no fees, save those charged by the credit card processors. If you are able and inclined, here is the link.
You may also continue to support Mark and our work here at SteynOnline in the traditional way through gift certificates, gift memberships, club membership, the store, and our annual cruise.