Paul Dacre has issued a staunch defence of his newspaper, the Daily Mail, in the face of questioning during the Leveson inquiry.

During questioning, Dacre told Robert Jay Q.C, that he presented a “bleak”, “somewhat one-sided picture of the Mail”, and that its readers enjoy and support the paper.

Dacre told the Leveson inquiry that he “categorically disputes” the idea that “we adopt an irresponsible stance on medical stories” following a line of questioning from Jay that focused on the Mail‘s coverage of cancer-related stories.

Jay, referring to a Daily Mail article headlined: ‘Cancer danger of that night-time trip to the toilet’  – which suggested that turning on a light to go to the toilet at night increases the risk of cancer – grilled the Mail’s long-standing editor on how responsible the newspaper’s journalists are when it comes to scientific reporting. In response, Dacre refuted claims of “sensationalism” and said his paper performed a huge range of good work on science and medical stories.

Another key area of Dacre’s evidence surrounded the role of the Press Complaints Commission. Dacre made the suggestion that journalists should be registered under a new regulator, all of whom would be granted a press card. This system of accreditation would steer journalists from ‘bad’ reporting techniques, especially if those journalists are ‘banned’ from high-profile press events. Dacre explained: “No publication could survive if its reporters were banned.”

Dacre also hit out at publications owned by Richard Desmond, labelling them full of “very bland, slightly sycophantic” journalism. He also shared his concerns of getting a new regulatory system to “lock-in” the likes of Desmond. “By and large, Mr Desmond does not produce the kind of journalism – mostly celebrity bland journalism – that would end up in this court or arbitration model,” he said.

(Source: MediaGuardian, Press Gazette)

No related posts.