Exhibit JC42 - The Leveson Inquiry

For Distribution to CPsHacks and Dons - Teaching at the London University Journalism School 1919-1939: Its origin,development and influence.The Beginnings of a London University School of JournalismIn a way it might be said that many of the problems surrounding thecourse only surfaced when there was the possibility of someone beingthere who was responsible for observing them. For most of its existence,until 1938 in fact, the course remained the property of inter-collegiateinterests whose main concern was to maintain their fee income at thehighest level, e6The attempt to simplify the syllabus, as instituted in 1935-36, andintroduced chiefly with the aim of reducing the large number of optionalsubjects, had, in fact, led to an increase in the number of compulsorysubjects to such an extent that it ’had proved beyond the capacity of themajority of the students. ’6~On top of the Practical Journalism taking up to one-third of the students’time they also had to prepare for five other compulsory subjects involvingattendance at seven lectures each week; also another two hours a weekwere needed for one optional subject chosen. The Syllabus for Courses for1938-39 shows the compulsory subjects as ’Practical Journalism’ with twohours a week, ’English Composition’ as one hour a week, along with’Principles of Criticism’ and ’Social and Economic Structure Today’ and thepaper on ’History of the Modern World from 1789.’ The last compulsorysubject, ’Modern Literature from 1850’ is shown as occupying two hours aweek.Not surprisingly some students in attendance at that time considered it’too academic ’68 and Miss Skipsey herself was of the opinion that theacademic and practical should not co-exist in the same course. 6~ Othersstill regard the time they spent at lectures by Mr. Hugh Gaitskell as thehighlight of their time on the course. TM The opportunity to ’taste the delights’of the academic richness of London University was something not to bemissed, and even those from the early days of the course regarded thelectures available as ’the centrepiece’ of the course. ’71To describe the course as having ’supposedly dubious academiccredentials ’72 misinterprets the issue. Far from being ’early victim of thealleged incompatibility between the academic and the vocational ’73 thehistory of the course in its last three years illustrates a determination tograpple with this problem and to find a solution to it.During the 1938-39 session the University Journalism Committee was inthe throes of yet another revision of course content and its progressdeserves attention, even though it was never to be put into effect.It would appear that there had been very little attempt to relate theacademic side of the course to the requirements of journalism; in fact,former students refer to lecturers ’despising the fact that we werejournalists ’74 while others found them so irrelevant that ’we played cards orchatted. ’75 As someone who had been both a student and involved withrunning the course as Clarke’s assistant from 1937 to 1939 Miss Skipseycommented: ’Nobody said, "Now if you’re going to be a journalist you mustunderstand the elements of economics as it is understood today." Nobodytalked like that to us. If I were teaching economics to journalists, I wouldstart off by arming myself with a bunch of clippings showing the kinds of93MOD100051264