Gosh, crikey – Hugh Grant breaks Leveson’s ethics proposals

Posted on March 3, 2013

As the self-appointed arbiter of media standards in the UK, Hugh Grant has a lot of opinions about what is and isn’t ethical journalism. Apparently the Guardian is perfectly ethical, while papers which report on, I don’t know, sex scandals involving English celebrity romcom actors are beyond the pale. Who knows how he settled on that view?

However he came by his moral code carved in stone doesn’t matter, he’s marched down the mountain and has spent several months using the tablets to lay about any who stand in his way.

Except perhaps he should read what they say before using them to clobber others. Take today’s tweet from the Media Moses:

That’s quite a big claim – that Rupert Murdoch personally ordered the Times Editor to order the Prime Minister to follow a specific policy and set of actions, which the PM immediately obeyed. What starts as a “rumour” has become, by the end of the tweet, supposedly solid fact that “Murdoch rules.”

Surely an ethical reporter would have given some evidence, quoted a source or even given any reason at all to believe it?

In fact, I seem to recall that the Leveson report had something to say about exactly that:

“45. A new regulatory body should consider encouraging the press to be as transparent as possible in relation to the sources used for stories, including providing any information that would help readers to assess the reliability of information from a source”

In short, Hugh Grant is promoting adopting the Leveson proposals by, err, going dead against Leveson’s proposals on evidence and sourcing. His “rumour” could have come from Tom Watson. It could have come from one of Murdoch’s own competitors. For that matter, Hugh Grant could just have made it up – but he has merrily injected it into the public debate, with no evidence or source in sight.

It’s hardly “ethical reporting”, is it, Hugh?



Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Categories: Opinion, Politics, Westminster


23 Responses

  1. Phil:

    Hugh Grant is a weapons-grade tosser.

    14.03.2013 19:23 Reply

  2. fitz fitz:

    Dopey Hugh fails to see that he’s the dupe of the leftists as they seek to impose press censorship . Key words: dopey, duped, Divine Brown, child .

    14.03.2013 20:30 Reply

  3. Stuck-Record:

    Can we report Hugh to the Commissariat Ministry of Truth Controller (as soon as they are appointed)?

    14.03.2013 20:52 Reply

    • Andrew Smith:

      I suspect Hughie might be a member of the said Commissariat, don’t you think. Acting career starting to wind down, number of dependents increasing, income needed.

      15.03.2013 09:32 Reply

  4. Dave Edwards:

    Hmmm … he does say at the start that it’s a ‘rumour’. Not sure what your issue is? Is it that Hugh likes the Grauniad? Or is it that he doesn’t believe Rupert to be a kindly selfless old man? Whereas I have not read the Leveson Report, it is my understanding that it makes little or no mention of Twitter or any other social networking platform. Considering what I have seen in the past on social sites, Hugh Grant’s remarks are quite humdrum and well within the bounds of an acceptable posting.

    14.03.2013 21:09 Reply

    • Mark Wallace:

      “he does say at the start that it’s a ‘rumour’.”
      Yes, and by the end it’s become a supposed fact – quite a leap for 140 characters and zero evidence.

      “Not sure what your issue is?”
      Hypocrisy, plain and simple. Hugh Grant wants a crucial institution like the press to follow a stringent set of rules that he can’t even be bothered to follow himself when making serious allegations.

      “it is my understanding that [Leveson] makes little or no mention of Twitter or any other social networking platform.”
      Precisely its main failing – the Leveson/Hacked Off proposals simply don’t fit with the modern media world. Hugh Grant has 100,000 twitter followers and has made himself into a commentator-cum-lobbyist. If an “and finally” news item in the middle of a newspaper should follow Leveson, as he suggests, on pain of being fined, why shouldn’t Hugh Grant?

      15.03.2013 14:06 Reply

  5. Hugh Grant forgets Hacked Off’s own rules. | Digital Politico:

    [...] as Mark Wallace so accurately points out, Hugh Grant doesn’t seem to like to play by his own his own rules. Here is a Hugh tweet from [...]

    14.03.2013 21:20 Reply

  6. Daniel Henry:

    I think Leveson’s regulations are more designed for professional journalists than for tweets…

    14.03.2013 22:22 Reply

    • Mark Wallace:

      Yout don’t think Hugh Grant should at least lead by example if he wants to persuade the entire press to do as he wishes?

      15.03.2013 14:07 Reply

  7. Ollie:

    WTF? Since when has Hugh Grant been a National Newspaper? And where in the Tweet does he say it’s a fact? I read some rubbish in my times, but you should win a cake!

    14.03.2013 22:24 Reply

    • Mark Wallace:

      “Since when has Hugh Grant been a National Newspaper?”
      Can you explain why a paper with 70,000 readers should be strictly regulated by the state, but Saint Hugh with 100,000 Twitter readers should not? One rule for the rest of us…

      “And where in the Tweet does he say it’s a fact?”
      The bit where he stops saying “I heard” and declares “Murdoch rules”.

      “I read some rubbish in my times, but you should win a cake!”
      I look forward to it.

      15.03.2013 14:09 Reply

  8. Aaron D Highside:

    People who pay hookers for in-car entertainment or who post pictures of themselves on the Web in their Y-fronts should not concern themselves with ethics.

    15.03.2013 05:46 Reply

  9. Popeye:

    Grant, failed actor, no, crap actor and abuser of young black courtesans.

    15.03.2013 07:09 Reply

  10. Mark:

    Errr….Hugh Grant is not a reporter, unless tweeting has taken the place of traditional journalism? Therefore, he has no need to provide evidence for his ‘opinion’ or ‘comment’ on Twitter. Case dismissed…

    15.03.2013 08:17 Reply

    • Mark Wallace:

      Leading by example has rather passed you guys by, hasn’t it. If he thinks those who wield influence through the media should obey his preferred set of rules, he should at least follow them himself when wielding media influence…

      15.03.2013 14:10 Reply

  11. Paniagua Solo:

    Grant is simply acting the part of a Journalist, and in typical Grant style in a crass un-researched way.
    At least Daniel Day Lewis would have looked at what a Journalist did behind the scenes rather than just the print output.
    Grant should stick to the lighter side of acting, you know the type where you don’t need any IQ

    15.03.2013 09:24 Reply

  12. cynic:

    NO YOU CANNOT REPORT HIM AS YOU WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO HAVE READ THE TWEET OR REPORT IN THE FIRST PLACE UNLESS,OF COURSE,YOU HAVE WRITTEN APPROVAL IN ADVANCE FROM THE CHIEF CENSOR

    15.03.2013 09:31 Reply

  13. Inkypinky:

    Miss Divine Brown of Los Angeles says ” I am following Hugh’s progress, blow by blow!

    15.03.2013 10:23 Reply

  14. stephen:

    What Divine irony.

    15.03.2013 11:18 Reply

  15. therealguyfaux:

    Humongo engaging in scurrilous gossip (“Rumour from Westminister…”); obviously he suffers from irony-deficiency anaemia …

    15.03.2013 12:55 Reply

  16. SonofBoudicca:

    Grant’s tweet is probably libellous of both Murdoch and Cameron. Let’s hope they both sue and shut the little twerp up for good.

    15.03.2013 13:32 Reply

  17. MrDavies:

    If, golly, Hugh Grant, gosh, doesn’t want the press up his arse, he should think twice before paying a whore to suck him off in public. Hands of our press you tosser.

    15.03.2013 15:32 Reply

  18. jay:

    The Hacked Off mob, they’re mostly all damaged goods in some way, with a need grinding their petty little axes. I find it especially nauseating, that Huge Grunt, a proven degenerate is given this platform.

    18.03.2013 14:19 Reply

Leave a Reply