- Daily Telegraph: We can now add David Cameron’s name to the defenders of press freedom. It’s a lonely and unpopular cause, but seems to have just acquired its single most important champion.
- Daily Mail: A rotten day for freedom: Yes, he got some things right. But to whitewash the politicians and the police while demanding the Press be shackled betrays dismaying naivety. Worse, it is a tragic blow to liberty and the public's right to know
Sarah Baxter editor of The Sunday Times Magazine has told Daybreak that the victims of the phone hacking scandal "are not the people who make the laws of this land."
She added: "They have had their say. They were listened to really respectively [and] they will [now] be treated with respect."
Lord Black of Brentwood, who was a key figure in drawing up proposals for enhanced self-regulation, says Lord Justice Leveson's proposals are "profoundly dangerous" and would put a state regulator "at the very heart of the newsroom".
Lord Black, the executive director of Telegraph, told the House of Lords the press would "rise energetically" to the challenge set by Leveson of toughening up regulation.
But he added:
Could I draw your attention to paragraph 6.16 of volume IV of the report which states that 'the recognition body would be required to determine whether the standards code meets the statutory requirements'.
That would be a state regulator at the very heart of the newsroom.
Would you agree with me that, if the industry can make rapid progress in the task of establishing a new system, such a move would not be just be profoundly dangerous but completely unnecessary?
The sweeping changes proposed in the Leveson report have united rival newspapers who are against Lord Justice Leveson's key idea. The Editor of the Independent told ITV News the outcome could have been harsher and others have questioned the idea that the broadcasting watchdog should oversee them.
Our UK Editor, Lucy Manning reports.
Prime Minister David Cameron voiced his "serious concerns and misgivings" about legislative action. But Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said Leveson's model could be "proportionate and workable". Read more about divisions in the coalition.
"We are grateful to Lord Justice Leveson for his thorough and comprehensive report, and will be studying its recommendations and comments in detail.
As a company we are keen to play our full part, with others in our industry, in creating a new body that commands the confidence of the public.
We believe that this can be achieved without statutory regulation – and welcome the Prime Minister’s rejection of that proposal.
– Tom Mockridge, News International Chief Executive
We accept that a new system should be independent, have a standards code, a means of resolving disputes, the power to demand prominent apologies and the ability to levy heavy fines.
We have spent 18 months reflecting upon these issues and are determined to move on as soon as possible with others in our sector to set up a new body that will ensure British journalism is both responsible and robust.
In a statement, News International says it accepts a new independent system with prominent apologies & heavy fines.
It welcomes the PM's rejection of statutory regulation.
There is an emerging division in the coalition over the issue of having a statutory under-pinning for a system of press regulation.
Here is what Lord Justice Leveson says on the matter:
There are many forms of statute law which already restrict the activities of the press, whether in terms of their organisation, competition or activities up to and including in limited cases what it may or may not be lawful to publish (race hate, for example).
On the face of it, these statutory restrictions are legitimate and proportionate exercises in democratic lawmaking, balancing competing public freedoms and goods ...
– Leveson report
But to contend that no statutory reform could be so is to push the argument far beyond any reasonable statement of principle.
Ultimately, there is no necessary connection between statutory underpinning of a regulatory system ... on the one hand, and state censorship on the other, nor in my view is there some sort of slippery slope gliding from the first to the second.
The Metropolitan Police Service has called Lord Justice Leveson's inquiry a "healthy and valuable process" and has welcomed its findings.
– Metropolitan Police statement
Although there were incidents that left a perception of cosiness between particular senior officers and some journalists, Lord Justice Leveson found that that did not influence or taint decision-making.
Indeed the Inquiry has said that the integrity of our officers directly involved in the 2006 investigation "shone through" and is not doubted.
The statement also pointed out that Leveson "accepted" the Met's reasons for closing the original 2006 phone-hacking investigation
– news international spokesperson
News International is considering the report carefully and is not making any immediate comment.
The chairman of the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) Lord Hunt has said the press must "hit the ground" to reform its practices.
He said he was still not persuaded that underpinning the regulatory system by a statute is the right move.