I'm in two minds about this enquiry as some amazing revelations are emerging yet I'm not too excited about the outcome will be.

For all the fine words being bandied about...for all the disgusting attitudes revealed..one thing has rarely been mentioned.

There is not one media enterprise ( except the BBC) that is not a private corporation that exists for the sole purpose of generating profit.

Not one single media worker does it for charity...they do it to pay their mortgage.

Yet the media as a whole demands rights not available for anyone else in the private sector..total self regulation. And when that's threatened they bleat as though they are there for the public good. And that is sheer bullshit.

Read this piece from a "a consultant and trainer in media law"

blogs.pressgazette.co.uk/wire/8515

he expresses an opinion that we may have in the future a 'something like a state-controlled police news feed'

he cannot see we have had that for at least 3 decades.

And Lord Justice Veritas I give you... the Internet!

A Jonathan King applied for Core Participant status at the Leveson Inquiry, I see.

JK, was that you and why was it declined?

Indeed it is me and yes I am still actively pursuiing the possibility - if not as a Core Participant Victim, at least as a Key Witness.

It's crazy that someone like JK isn't asked to participate.

I think GG should ask to speak.

He has been relentlessly hounded from pillar to post for no good reason.

and the tabloids have probably cost the public purse hundreds of thousands of pounds in police protection.

but could he bear it ?...either they would eat him up and spit him out or he may be able to state his position in the calmest forum he will ever get !!

Prunella Minge wrote:
It's crazy that someone like JK isn't asked to participate.

I agree. But, how far do they go back?

For example, they ignored Hillsborough with MacKenzie.

The public have long since lost interest in this inquiry and who can blame them. And what will be the outcome? A more restricted and regulated press? Or not? It is dull beyond belief. In ten years nearly all the tabloids will be history as we know them with people accessing news in various different ways through new media, and many of the red tops will fold completely.

The Fat Controller wrote:
The public have long since lost interest in this inquiry and who can blame them. And what will be the outcome? A more restricted and regulated press? Or not? It is dull beyond belief. In ten years nearly all the tabloids will be history as we know them with people accessing news in various different ways through new media, and many of the red tops will fold completely.

as I say..the best outcome would be for the 'man in the street' to have recourse for retractions just as the rich do. I'm not confident.

Politicians will still take their cue from the tabloids.

I'm still trying to get Core Participant Victim status (I think they feel wrongful conviction and media monstering is not as serious as getting false hope your child is alive and how could I possibly criticise such sensible values?) but at least feel an examination of my experiences would inform the Inquiry.

It rather depends what their agenda is. If, as I suspect, it's to fulfil Cameron's media intention to SEEM to be doing something about it and gain good media points with the public, then they should avoid me like the plague.

If it's actually to improve the situation (and, like Veritas, I'm sceptical) then hearing from me is essential and vital.