Press Complaints Commission surveys public on press regulation

This article was migrated from an old version of our website in 2025. As a result, it might have some low-quality images or non-functioning links - if there's any issues you'd like to see fixed, get in touch with us at info@journalism.co.uk.

Members of the public favour a public apology over a fine for newspapers and magazines that breach the Code of Practice upheld by the Press Complaints Commission, a survey of public attitudes towards the industry body suggests .

As part of the survey conducted for the PCC by Toluna , which polled a nationally representative sample of 1,017 adults, respondents were given the choice between "a quick public apology" or a "fine after a lengthy legal process".

According to the survey, the newspaper and magazine industry should fund the press complaints process. This option was backed by 87 per cent of those surveyed, with just 3 per cent suggesting the taxpayer foot the bill for the PCC.

A majority (81 per cent) of respondents had heard of the PCC, with 58 per cent saying they knew the organisation, "a little", "a fair amount" or "very well".

Support was given to the PCC's current structure, which includes journalists and members of the public as members of the commission: 51 per cent supported this mixture with just 3 per cent of those surveyed favouring an organisation run exclusively by journalists.

Views on how the commission identifies and deals with complaints were also sought. Most respondents (58 per cent) felt the PCC should not take action against a newspaper or magazine for an article breaching the code with "inappropriate" references to an individual without contacting that individual first. But Martin Moore, director of the Media Standards Trust, suggested in a blog post that the question was leading, writing that the survey should not ask whether the PCC should just go wading in, but "what should prompt the PCC to assess whether an article(s) has broken the editorial code?"

In the poll, 6 per cent of respondents said they felt the PCC was very effective and 39 per cent thought it was effective. Only 14 per cent rated it as ineffective or very ineffective in dealing with complaints from members of the public about the editorial content of newspapers and magazines, but 41 per cent said they had no opinion.

"On its own, this figure is not very helpful. Most members of the public have not had experience of complaining to the PCC, therefore it is very difficult for them to judge whether it is effective or ineffective," says Moore on his blog. In February 2009 the Media Standards Trust conducted its own survey into UK press regulation , which suggested public support for reform of the PCC. But the report was slammed by then chairman of the PCC Sir Christopher Meyer , who said it contained "innumerable inaccuracies and flawed analysis".