You report (Watchdog to pursue inquiry into sex sting against MP Brooks Newmark, 20 October) that one of the MPs targeted by the Sunday Mirror’s freelance journalists in the online “sexting” sting, Mark Pritchard, has withdrawn his complaint against the Sunday Mirror. The details of the “amicable settlement” are said to be confidential. The Independent Press Standards Organisation says “we would be pleased if it were the case that resolution has been achieved, since that would be a success for the Ipso complaints process”.
We should be concerned when a newspaper makes a secret deal with an MP (possibly involving a financial settlement or the offer of future good publicity) behind the back of the regulator. We should be especially concerned if the result of the secret deal is that the MP drops his complaint, possibly preventing the regulator getting the full truth. If the regulator considers that a regulatory “success”, then the main difference between the new sham regulator Ipso and the failed and toothless PCC, which it replaced, is now clear. Ipso, it seems, is rather more desperate in both its propaganda and spin operation.
Joan Smith
Executive editor, Hacked Off
• You report (20 October) that internet trolls will face two years in jail under Chris Grayling’s new plans. How will “internet troll” be defined? As a person who makes any comment which offends anyone? An ordinary person who “shouts” to be heard in a conversation dominated by famous or influential people? Social media should be available for the use of all society, not just its upper echelon. Of course, if someone makes a credible threat of violence against another person, that should be prosecuted through existing laws. But the proposed new laws imply that social media will be limited to well-known and powerful people giving us their view of the world (and promoting their latest product, film, etc), while the rest of us can only “follow” our favourites.
We would be powerless to tell Russell Brand or Jeremy Clarkson or Polly Toynbee what we really thought of them, because of the inevitable offence caused. By posting a message saying “I bought your book but didn’t like it”, an ordinary person would not be heard. By posting a message saying “I spent eight hours of my life reading your faeces recycled as paper. I am going to torture you for eight hours in return”, that same person will be noticed, but will be banged up for two years for being offensive and threatening (even though it is obvious that the threat is not credible).
Dominic Rayner
Leeds
