The British Tabloid Press = Unpleasant People

I've always had a bit of a thing about misrepresentation. I hate people saying things about me which aren't true, and I despise others telling me they know what's going on in my head - there's very little chance you actually do, unless you're my wife and thus psychic (in a nice way).

The British tabloid press are the very worst for this kind of thing. They simply make stuff up, all day and all night, and people buy it (literally and figuratively). They can't be hauled up on it because it's like a runaway train, gathering momentum, flinging aside the innocent and the guilty with equal measures of blatant falsehoods. There's no point fighting it, because you can't afford it unless you're very rich, and even then you'd have to really want to get stuck in, because it's not going to be easy. Just look at this article to see what I mean.

Oh yes, I'll support the freedom of the press to report the truth, and of course opinion articles are important, but the two so often seem to be confused in the minds of the desperate, money-grabbing tabloid editors' pathetic little minds (it is, of course, merely opinion that the minds of the tabloid editors are pathetic and little - they may well be as large as any normal person's mind. Just not as capable of moral rectitude, perhaps...). Often 'artistic license' is used as a by-phrase (like a byword, only longer) for 'making shit up and passing it off as fact'. This ires me in the way that any injustice does, especially when there's so little chance of comeback.

So, what's the solution? If you've read this blog before, you'll know I like coming up with an answer, and this article is no diferent. The answer is thus:

Newspapers will be required to hold documentary evidence of every single factual claim made in their publications. Should a claim be made that the newspaper has falsely reported, and the paper is unable to defend its 'facts', then it shall instantly be find £1000 for every false word printed.

There will, of course, have to be a panel of experts examining claims against newspapers - perhaps the fines could fund them. Judging by the amount of nonsense published daily in the British press, there should be ample financial support for several hundred of these people each year. And the great thing is the burden of proof is on the newspapers - go ahead, boys, publish what you like... if you can back it up.

Of course, this will lead to hundreds of thousands of claims a year. The papers will be inundated. Reporters will have to spend countless hours in tribunals, defending their false stories and not sitting around making things up. It would be a disaster for an important institution, surely? Well, no, it wouldn't, because all a paper would have to do is be able to provide evidence upon request that their story is based upon fact.

And to prevent spurious claims? A £1000 penalty on the claimant should the story turn out to be wholly true.

It's a self-regulating system. No more lies, no more need for libel lawyers to be paid a mint for very little work. See? It just gets better.

There, problem solved.