It calls on the prime minister Gordon Brown to make the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) a public body.
"Following the article in the Daily Mail on Friday 16 October by Jan Moir in relation to the death of Stephen Gately, the PCC received over 21,000 complaints; however the chairman of the code committee for the PCC is currently the editor of the Daily Mail, Paul Dacre," it states.
"(...)The PCC was weakened by preferential treatment to the newspaper industry and it lacked sufficient powers to appropriately deal with cases. The government needs to abolish the current PCC and relaunch the committee as a public body so the public can have faith in the PCC once again."
Its proposer, Daniel Sullivan believes the commission at the moment 'is hardly going to impose any kind of sanction or penalty towards the Daily Mail [over Jan Moir]'."The set-up of the PCC would be something like a criminal appearing in court. As his own judge and jury, it's very unlikely a crook would give himself a prison sentence," he told Journalism.co.uk.
"The Jan Moir article was the final nail in the coffin as far as I am concerned for the PCC, and it's a shock that it's not as publicised as it should be that the newspaper industry regulates itself."
In Sullivan's opinion, broadcasting regulator Ofcom should cover the press as well as TV.
In response to the petition, deputy director of the PCC, Stephen Abell, said: "Paul Dacre chairs the committee responsible for the wording of the Code of Practice. He has no involvement in the decision-making of the Press Complaints Commission. The PCC has a majority of public members and a chairman fully independent of the industry.
"If a complaint is raised about the title of one of the editors who does sit on the Commission, that editor plays no part whatsoever in the consideration of the complaint.
"The PCC provides help for thousands of people every year, free of charge. People who actually use the service tend to find that it works," Abell said, citing customer satisfaction statistics at this link.
Sullivan, who is funding advertisement of the petition in the local and gay press, is ambitious for the success of the petition: "I believe that articles such as Jan Moir's appearing in the national press with no apparent consequences for printing such vile smut will lead - and probably has already led - to further homophobic attacks."
Collective action debated
Meanwhile online campaigns targeting individuals, such as the one against Jan Moir, have sparked widespread national debate. For example, writing on her personal blog, the Times web development editor, Joanna Geary, has raised questions over collective action.
"I've seen many use the Jan Moir affair as an example of democracy in action. It is certainly true that the will of many people led to the removal of advertising from an offensive and homophobic article and an apology from its author.
"Now you can't say that's a bad thing… can you? So why do I feel so uneasy about it? I think it's not about the events themselves, but the implications of online collective action."
Related reading on Journalism.co.uk: Comment from Matthew Cain 'Why Jan Moir and the Daily Mail will escape disciplinary action'
Free daily newsletter
If you like our news and feature articles, you can sign up to receive our free daily (Mon-Fri) email newsletter (mobile friendly).
