Showing posts with label Leveson Inquiry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Leveson Inquiry. Show all posts

Saturday, December 22, 2012

Actor Hugh Grant wins large phone-hacking damages payout (REUTERS)


Reuters/Reuters - Actor Hugh Grant, a high profile campaigner on press intrusion, arrives to attend the release of Lord Justice Brian Leveson report on media practices in central London November 29, 2012. REUTERS ANDREW WINNING


LONDON (Reuters) - British actor Hugh Grant has accepted a "substantial sum" after settling his phone-hacking damages action against the publishers of the now defunct News of the World, his lawyer said on Friday.

The actor, a strident critic of Britain's tabloid newspaper culture, will donate the money to 'Hacked Off', a pressure group that helped bring about a public inquiry into press practices.

"Hugh Grant has today settled his claims for damages and other legal remedies arising out of the unlawful activities of News of the World journalists and others over a number of years," the actor's lawyer said in a statement.

(Reporting By Alessandra Prentice; Editing by Sophie Hares)


READ MORE: http://news.yahoo.com/actor-hugh-grant-wins-large-phone-hacking-damages-201530907.html

Friday, November 30, 2012

Hugh Grant U.K. TV Documentary Includes Piers Morgan Phone Hacking Comments (Video) 8:00 AM PST 11/28/2012 by George Szalai (HOLLYWOOD REPORTER)

Previously unseen footage of the CNN host and then-tabloid editor saying "a spate of stories" came out "because of mobile phones" could reignite an old debate.



LONDON - A Hugh Grant TV documentary set to air in the U.K. Wednesday night includes previously unseen 2003 footage of CNN host Piers Morgan telling British singer Charlotte Church about news stories that emerged thanks to phone hacking.

Channel 4, which will air Hugh Grant: Taking on the Tabloids at 8 p.m. London time, posted a video clip of the footage on YouTube Wednesday. It could reignite the debate about former Daily Mirror editor Morgan and his knowledge about hacking.

Channel 4 said Church's chat with Morgan was filmed when singer was 17 and preparing to address a crowd about a potential privacy law to protect under-18-year-olds.

During the Leveson Inquiry into media ethics and standards in the U.K., Morgan denied any involvement in hacking or having any reason to believe that it may have been used during his time at the Daily Mirror. As Channel 4 put it: "Piers Morgan has always said that he knew phone hacking existed, and he still maintains that he never knowingly used it."

Earlier this year, BBC host Jeremy Paxman told the Leveson Inquiry that Morgan once described how hacking works during a lunch event.



READ MORE: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hugh-grant-uk-tv-documentary-395005


Email: Georg.Szalai@thr.com
Twitter: @georgszalai


Saturday, November 24, 2012

Hugh Grant documentary to air night before Leveson report published (GUARDIAN)


Ben Dowell
guardian.co.uk, Friday 23 November 2012 13.40 EST


A 60-minute documentary called Hugh Grant: Taking on the Tabloids will show at an as yet unspecified time on Wednesday Photograph: Jemal Countess/Getty Images
Hugh Grant's Channel 4 documentary following the actor's campaign for stricter press regulation has been parachuted into the schedule on Wednesday night – on the eve of the publication of the Leveson report.

The 60-minute programme, called Hugh Grant: Taking on the Tabloids, is to air at 8pm on the network on the evening of 28 November, in a gesture that anti-regulation campaigners will interpret as provocative.

Taking on the Tabloids is an observational documentary following Grant campaigning for stricter press regulation in recent weeks, including interviews with those for and against such a move.

Interviews for the documentary are still being filmed, with the programme unlikely to be finished until close to transmission.

But it is understood that Channel 4 and the independent production company making the documentary – Roger Graef's Films of Record – are making what they describe as an "extremely balanced programme", which includes the views of the Hacked Off campaign for stricter press regulation – of which Grant is a director – as well as the views of opponents who regard such a move as a threat to freedom of speech.

Lord Hunt, the Press Complaints Commission chairman who favours a revamped version of self-regulation as a solution to the concerns about press activity, is understood to have been interviewed at length by the producers.

The film includes a scene relating to Conservative MP Alun Cairns's complaint about it: he told the Daily Mail he believed the documentary was likely to be biased. A sequence has been shot in which Grant reads the Mail's story out to camera, according to Hacked Off sources.



Thursday, June 21, 2012

Hugh Grant takes the fight to Brussels (IRISH TIMES)



AFTER HIS magnetic if surreal performances on Question Time, Newsnight and at the Leveson inquiry, Hugh Grant will reprise his role as a media ethics crusader in Brussels next week at a forum on media pluralism, called Wider? World? Web?

Grant, who has argued in favour of tougher sanctions for media organisations that break industry codes of conduct, will take part in a panel discussing media ownership at the forum on June 27th.

Perhaps deterred by Grant’s movie-star charm, News International has declined an organisers’ offer to put forward a representative to debate from the same platform, although it has indicated that it will be present at it.

The event will “definitely not be ‘yet another conference on the media’,” according to organisers from Belgium’s University of Leuven, Gray’s Inn in London and Italy’s Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom.


READ MORE: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0621/1224318352817.html


Friday, March 16, 2012

Hugh Grant: 'I love getting into a taxi and saying House of Lords instead of Soho – again' (GUARDIAN)

Decca Aitkenhead guardian.co.uk


Hugh Grant with a model of the character he voices in his latest film, The Pirates! In An Adventure With Scientists. Photograph: William Selden for the Guardia



In his latest role, he's taken on the tabloids – 'a vicious and vindictive industry'. But soon Hugh Grant will be back on familiar ground, giving voice to a big, barrel-chested pirate. In a rare interview, he tells Decca Aitkenhead about standing up for what is right, fatherhood and the genius of Aardman.

The Hugh Grant I meet in a west London restaurant could barely look less relaxed if I'd found him in the dock at the Old Bailey. The mischievously witty actor we know from our screens is nowhere to be seen; in his place is a sober and strained-looking man who actually shudders as we greet.

"Well, I'm very unrelaxed doing a newspaper interview. I think it's only the third British newspaper interview I've done to promote a film in 16 years. But I want to be nice to the Guardian, because I think they've been brilliant." He looks excruciatingly uncomfortable. "Yes, that would be correct," he concurs. How horrible is this for him? "Well, I really hate giving newspaper interviews. I don't want people to be able to say, 'Oh look, he's using this hacking issue to get attention for himself.' It just sticks in my craw if it's about me." Is this as bad as he'd feared? "Yes. It is."

I confess I'm nervous, too, unsure how to interview the star of a campaign against press intrusion without trespassing on the very privacy he's been so persuasively defending. Ever since Grant became the poster boy of the Hacked Off campaign against press criminality and corruption, the tabloids have been poisonous, hounding the mother of his newborn child and accusing him of lying to the Leveson inquiry.




READ MORE:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/mar/16/hugh-grant-hacking-pirates-film?newsfeed=true



Saturday, February 11, 2012

Hugh Grant stands by his claim of phone hacking



Hugh Grant


Hugh Grant has refused to withdraw his suggestion that Associated Newspapers obtained information about him through phone hacking.

Mr Grant made the allegation about the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday to the Leveson Inquiry.

The actor told the BBC on Saturday that newspapers were not used to having their methods questioned.

Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre has denied the allegations, describing them as "mendacious smears".

In an interview with BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr Grant said: "I can see why they're cross because for once someone has had the courage to question their probity and their honesty.

"Generally speaking, if anyone does that with a paper like the Daily Mail, however much they may go on about freedom of speech, no one is allowed the freedom of speech to question the Daily Mail.

"If you do, you will be trashed. And that's what happened again and again and again to me and anyone else who has dared to question the Daily Mail."

Mr Grant said he would like the Leveson Inquiry into the practices of the press to result in a new regulatory body, in place of the Press Complaints Commission, with "teeth to sanction newspapers that go wrong".

He added: "The lowest priority in all my ranting and raving about media reform is my case or the case of any so-called celebrity."

Mr Grant denied he was actively giving up information about personal matters while promoting his films.

He said: "When you sit and do an interview are you asked about acting technique or are you asked 'how's your love life, what's it like with Liz Hurley?'

"You then have a choice. You can be Mr Pompous and say 'I really don't talk about my private life' or you can try and be a good sport and give a jokey answer."

Associated Newspapers told the Today programme that it had nothing to add to what Mr Dacre had said at the Leveson Inquiry.


Read further and listen to the BBC audio:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16995541

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Hugh Grant adds touch of Tinseltown spice at rare red carpet sighting as he poses in a sea of C-listers (Daily Mail)

Fancy a Hollyoaks cameo?

By Nadia Mendoza

Last updated at 11:28 AM on 1st February 2012

Red carpet events often pull in a strange crowd of famous faces, with Kerry Katona and TOWIE stars easily rubbing shoulders with the likes of Brangelina.

And so last night, amidst the sea of Hollyoaks stars and radio DJs, A-lister Hugh Grant popped up.

The Four Weddings And A Funeral actor, 51, posed with Sara Cox and Annie Mac at the Centre Point: Ultimate Pub Quiz held at the Paramount Centre Point in London.


An A-list visit: Hugh Grant poses with Sara Cox and Annie Mac
An A-list visit: Hugh Grant poses with Sara Cox and Annie Mac

Despite busily filming his latest project Cloud Atlas in Germany, the foppish heartthrob has been on UK shores giving evidence at the Leveson inquiry and also visiting his newborn lovechild.
Last November, shock news emerged that commitment-phobe Grant had a daughter with unknown Chinese actress Tinglan Hong, 19 years his junior, following a fleeting affair.

But the BAFTA-winner was back to the day last night, sharing the attention with a variety of famous faces, including Hollyoaks beauties Jorgie Porter and Anna Shaffer, Jonathan Ross and Fern Britton


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2094723/Hugh-Grant-adds-touch-Tinseltown-spice-rare-red-carpet-sighting-poses-sea-C-listers.html#ixzz1lAOJRKXo


Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Will the Leveson inquiry kill celebrity magazines? (The Guardian)

Readers can no longer dismiss celebrity news as harmless fun. The gossip game will change tone
Hugh Grant
Hugh Grant: awesome. Photograph: Pool/Reuters

As compelling as it has often been, the Leveson inquiry hasn't really told us anything new about the celebrity news game. Celebrities use their wealth to try to suppress embarrassing stories about themselves; the paparazzi hassle famous people constantly, often to the point of harassment; some editors bully and cajole celebs into giving them stories; certain reporters lie, cheat and cut corners; there is a generic pin number you can use to access other people's voicemail messages if they haven't reset it; Hugh Grant is awesome. All of this (with the definite exception of the last one) is stuff people knew or strongly suspected already. Tales of reporters going through celebrity rubbish bins are so familiar they are cliched. And it's been 11 years since a pap was found hiding inside the organ at Madonna and Guy Ritchie's son's christening venue, having spent the previous 24 hours defecating into a bin bag in order to remain undetected.

So it's not like the public thought the celebrity scandals they devoured every week were simply the results of a few polite inquiries made by methodical hacks to helpful publicists. They knew – we all knew – how certain elements of the tabloid press rolled. They just tried not to dwell on it while reading the papers over Sunday breakfast.

In that sense, it is similar to last year's MPs' expenses scandal: much of the surprise has been synthetic. MPs diddling their receipts, just like hacks "monstering" celebs, is one of those things we always had an inkling was commonplace. We just turned a blind eye. But 2011 was the year when turning a blind eye became increasingly difficult.

It is unclear what practical action Leveson might deem necessary to take against the celebrity news media. But any legislative reform is unlikely to have as much impact as the cultural shift that the inquiry is helping to bring about. This lengthy process has made it impossible for many consumers of celebrity media to suspend their disbelief any longer. The sheer relentlessness with which the ugly details of certain tabloid reporting techniques have been drip-fed by the inquiry has forced the issue to the forefront of the public consciousness. Perceptions of celebrity culture are being altered sufficiently to make a significant and lasting commercial impact.

And public perception is pretty much the only thing that can make a real difference to the way in which celebrity gossip is reported. The existing laws can't: the super-injunction scandals of last spring proved that. By attempting to go through the courts to suppress stories about their private lives, celebrities only served to make those stories bigger, more powerful and twice as likely to leak online. Celebrities with a gripe can always sue for libel, defamation, lies or what have you. But for nine out of 10 stars the process is often too costly, both in terms of money and career prospects. Besides, as Steve Coogan pointed out to the inquiry, disputed front-page splashes are usually, at best, apologised for in 100 inconspicuous words in the bottom corner of the letters page. Meanwhile, the Press Complaints Commission hovers around the fringes of the whole mess like an ineffectual supply teacher at a playground gang-fight, politely asking the knife-wielding combatants to adhere to Queensberry rules.

But editors are acutely sensitive and obsessively responsive to changing demand among their readers. And while the Leveson inquiry might not be enough to halt all demand for celebrity scandal, it might just do enough to alienate a key demographic from the sector.

There has always been a hardcore of celebrity gossip consumers who devour that stuff with a sincere relish. But the golden age of celebrity culture in the noughties was dependent on the growth of a new constituency: the "soft" celebrity consumer. This was the generation of smart, largely female, often middle-class readers who slipped a copy of the News of the World inside their Sunday broadsheet and grinned about their weekly gossip-magazine habit. Theirs was a tongue-in-cheek, slightly ironic fascination with the colourful and absurd celebrity circus. They became the large minority of the market who, by supplementing more diehard celebrity news obsessives, created a critical mass that made celebrity publishing a multimillion-pound business.

That demographic had already started to drift away from the newsstand in recent years, as commercial pressures forced much of the celeb media to abandon the fun, irreverent brand of reporting and resort increasingly to straight-between-the-eyes scandal. But this year has accelerated the process: squishing the faces of these amateur celeb-lovers in a vice and some eyelid-clamps and forcing them to confront the dark realities of the gossip trade they have been supporting. Of course, not all of that trade is culpable, but the wrongdoing of a small group of hacks has caused a ripple effect.

It is akin to a meat-eater going on a tour of an abattoir: you already knew what went on in those places, but now you've seen it, you may never be able to eat a sausage again.

The upshot is that celebrity gossip is fast losing its disarming veneer of innocent frivolity. Many people who used to brandish their celeb weekly as a badge of good-humoured ordinariness are now too ashamed to do so. It's a shame for the numerous enjoyable celebrity weeklies (such as Heat, Closer and Grazia) that remain largely harmless fanzines. But there it is. The commercial repercussions of this are significant enough to shut certain titles down for good and alter the ways that others go about their business in the future.

Celebrity faces will always dominate the newsstand. Famous types still have too much to gain from a reciprocal relationship with the press (this is probably why you haven't seen the stars with the real stories to tell – Victoria Beckham, Cheryl Cole and Lily Allen – at the Leveson inquiry). But what now seems certain is a shift towards a more reserved brand of celebrity coverage across all print media. This is something the market has already displayed an appetite for: Hello! magazine, with its slightly old-fashioned, reverential and altogether more PR-endorsed flavour of celebrity news, has been almost the only weekly gossip magazine to defy a general downturn in sales over the past couple of years (it was the only celebrity weekly to actually increase sales over the past year, by an impressive 26.8%). Brace yourselves. By 2013, every title on the newsstand may well feature a gushing profile of Nancy Dell'Olio, lounging on a chaise longue "inside her beautiful home".

Sam Delaney is a former editor of Heat magazine

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/dec/26/leveson-inquiry-celebrity-magazines

Saturday, November 26, 2011

UK media inquiry becomes hottest show in town as JK Rowling, Hugh Grant take tabloids to task

By Associated Press, Published: November 25


LONDON — It was a bad week to be a tabloid journalist in Britain.
For four days, the famous, the infamous, the bereaved and the wronged sat in a London courtroom and told how snooping, smears and snatched photographs had made their lives a misery. They portrayed the press as cynical and brutal in its treatment of individuals, capitalizing on their tragedies with little decency or compassion.
 
High-profile celebrities testified in UK courts about how they say they were hounded by paparazzi after their phones were hacked. (Nov. 25)
High-profile celebrities testified in UK courts about how they say they were hounded by paparazzi after their phones were hacked. (Nov. 25)

A-list witnesses including J.K. Rowling, Hugh Grant, and Sienna Miller turned Britain’s media ethics inquiry into the most compelling drama in town. But critics say it’s a misleading and one-sided show.
“It has not been a pretty sight,” said Bob Satchwell of media group the Society of Editors. “But there are 1,300 newspapers, national and regional, in Britain, and most journalists don’t behave in the way that’s being portrayed.”

The behavior of Britain’s scandalmongering, scoop-hungry and millions-selling tabloids was summed up by “Harry Potter” creator Rowling as “cavalier.” The best-selling author said newspapers took the attitude that “You’re famous, you’re asking for it.”

Rowling recounted how journalists slipped a note into her 5-year-old daughter’s school bag, took pictures of her children in their swimsuits and staked out her home until she felt “like a hostage.”
Grant said that since “Four Weddings and a Funeral” made him a star, details of his hospital visits had been leaked, his garbage rifled, his ex girlfriend and infant daughter harassed.

Miller, the star of “Alfie” and “Layer Cake,” described being pursued down the street at midnight by 10 large men.

“And the fact that they had cameras in their hands meant that that was legal,” said the 29-year-old actress. “But if you take away the cameras, what have you got? You’ve got a pack of men chasing a woman.”

Witnesses’ detailed descriptions of aggressive press intrusion, broadcast live on British television, have focused public attention on murky tabloid practices.

Media lawyer David Allen Green wrote in a blog for the New Statesman magazine that the inquiry was already helping freedom of expression.

“The merit of the Leveson inquiry — regardless of its formal findings in its reports — is that it is giving a platform to those whose voices are deliberately smothered by the tabloid press,” he wrote.
Not all the witnesses were famous. Some suffered because of proximity to fame. Mary Ellen Field, who worked for Elle Macpherson, recounted how the supermodel blamed her when personal stories started appearing in the press, and forced Field to go to a rehab facility in the U.S. for her — nonexistent — alcoholism.

Macpherson later learned her phone had been hacked — newspapers were getting information by illegal eavesdropping, not because of any indiscretion on Field’s part. Field had already been fired.
The parents of missing and murdered children told of much worse ordeals, of unbearable intrusion at times of grief.

Kate McCann, whose daughter Madeleine vanished during a family holiday in Portugal in 2007, said she felt “totally violated” when extracts from her private diary appeared in the News of the World tabloid in 2008.

Washington Post

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

It's Not Just the Tabloid Press That's on Trial


It was, in its moving and sometimes funny way, as English as roast beef. First, the suburban couple whose dead daughter's hacked phone messages triggered this inquiry, as modest and dignified as grieving human beings can be. And later, the performance of his life from an actor world famous for his English understatement, but who had decided that understatement was no longer enough.

There was nothing funny, of course, about the Dowlers' testimony to the Leveson Inquiry on Monday, the first time they had spoken publicly about the events that made them think their dead daughter was alive. Sally Dowler didn't, she told the court, sleep for three nights after hearing that her daughter's phone had been hacked. "You replay everything in your mind," she said. She was thinking back, she said, to those moments when she'd thought "something untoward is going on".

"Something untoward" was certainly going on, something that meant she could suddenly hear her daughter's voice on her voicemail, and that someone could print a photograph of a walk that no one except she, her husband, and the police knew about, a walk retracing their daughter's last steps. The photograph, she said, made her "really cross", and so did the fact that whenever she went out of her front door, she "had to be on guard".

But when she met the chairman of the media company whose employees had made her life even more of a hell than it had been before, she wanted to be fair. Rupert Murdoch was, she told the court, "very sincere". She and her husband were, she said, "ordinary people", with "no experience in such a public life situation".

"We tried," she said, and it's hard to hear the words without wanting to cry, "to be as balanced as we could."

You couldn't really describe Hugh John Mungo Grant, as we learnt he's called, as an "ordinary" person. You couldn't really say that he has "no experience" in "a public life situation." If he ever thought that playing a bumbling bachelor in films that turned out to be unexpectedly popular would mean a few staged interviews and photoshoots, and a private life that was free as a bird, he soon learnt he was wrong. You don't, in fact, get all that much more public than having the police mugshot taken of you when you were found performing "a lewd act" in a car with a prostitute splashed on the front pages of papers around the world.

Grant, to be fair, which lots of people don't seem to want to be, including Piers Morgan, who tweeted on Monday that he hoped Nelson Mandela was watching the inquiry, "so he could understand what real persecution is all about," seemed to take the whole thing in his stride. He kept his appointment on an American chat show, which was booked a few days later, and told Jay Leno, with the honesty that seems to have become his trademark, "I think you know in life what's a good thing to do and what's a bad thing, and I did a bad thing. And there," he said, "you have it." And when he was invited, on the Larry King show, to come up with some kind of explanation for his behaviour, he wouldn't. "I don't," he said, "have excuses."

On Monday, 16 years after the arrest that made him even more famous, he said it again. "I was arrested," he said, "it was on public record. I totally expected there to be tons of press, a press storm. That happened," he said, "and I have no quarrel with it." What he did have a quarrel with, he went on to say, was the fact that his flat was burgled, and nothing in it stolen, just before a full description of its décor appeared in a tabloid newspaper, and the fact that medical symptoms, reported during a trip to Accident & Emergency, appeared in a tabloid newspaper, and the fact that when a girlfriend was mugged, and they called the police, it was the photographers who came round first.

And the fact that when an ex-girlfriend went into hospital to have his baby, which no one knew about except her parents, who didn't speak English, and his cousin, who he says wouldn't have told anyone, he didn't dare visit his own first child "because of the danger of a leak" bringing a "press storm down." Which, when he couldn't resist "a quick visit," which you can kind of understand, is exactly what happened. Since then, the mother of his child, who never sought the life of a "celebrity," and isn't his partner, and probably didn't plan to have his child, has been unable to leave her home without being chased. Her life, she says, has become "unbearable."

Newspapers, he said, claimed that "celebrities" deserved to have their sex lives exposed because they were trading on false images. "I wasn't aware," he said, "that I was trading on my good name. I've never had a good name. I'm the man who was arrested with a prostitute." He didn't want, he said, to see "the end of popular print journalism," but there was "a section of our press" that had been allowed to become "toxic."

Yes, there is a section of our press that has become "toxic," but this isn't just about the press. When people rush out to buy newspapers that plaster the secrets of people's sex lives, and medical records, and interior décor, and unannounced pregnancies, and private walks in their dead daughter's last steps, where do they think they come from? Do they think the "celebrities" involved are just so thrilled to be "celebrities" that they can't resist phoning tabloid hacks to spill more beans? Do they think it's done on a nice cup of tea and a handshake? Blame the hacks if you like, but what about the "sources," in hospitals, and police stations, and clinics, and hotels, and restaurants, who see any whiff of a "celebrity" life as a fast track to a fast buck?

There is a system for ensuring that people's phones aren't hacked. It's called the law. If the police who were meant to be upholding it had acted on the evidence they had, then quite a lot of this horrible, ugly, shameful exploitation of what ought to have been private grief, and, in Grant's case, private joy, wouldn't have happened. But it wouldn't change a culture that makes "celebrity" a god, and one to be envied, and destroyed.

If Hugh Grant is a King Canute, trying to fend off the lapping tides of an ocean that threatens to drown us, an ocean where every single aspect of the life of anyone you've heard of is public property, then good for him. He's big enough to look after himself, but he isn't, I believe, just thinking of himself. He's thinking of the people who are suddenly thrust into the limelight, and tossed to the lions, or wolves. He's thinking, in fact, in what you might say was quite a plucky English way, of the underdog.

The Leveson Inquiry is about much, much more than the press. It's about what Grant appealed to, and the Dowlers embodied: "Our British sense of decency." It's also about what we used to call fair play.
Follow Christina Patterson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/queenchristina_