Exhibit JC42 - The Leveson Inquiry

For Distribution to CPsThe importance and meaning of the London University Diploma for Journalism courseWhen asked how he rated the Diploma for Journalism course in its lastyear, the late Geoffrey Pinnington, himself the last person to win theHarmsworth Gold Medal for Journalism in 1939, recalled: ’It was very muchnearer the thinking behind the Liberal Arts courses in the 1970s, and notthe deep specialisation in a narrow beam. I found that sort of discipline,even at a relatively superficial level, was invaluable to me later; not tobecome a critic but to know what critical thinking was about, and to know alittle bit about Iogic...it helped with my thinking, and thinking is whatjournalism is all about in the long run. ’~2Pinnington’s estimate contrasts sharply with the student who hadattended the course from 1920-21 and left convinced that ’the quality ofacademic material was so great that absorption prevented apprehension.Learning prevented thinking. ’~3Since the syllabus scheduled to begin in 1940s was never implemented,we can only surmise how influential a fully-fledged School of Journalismmight have become as an educational factor within London University, andwhat effect it might have had upon the development of British journalismand the role of women within the profession.E The First and subsequent Royal Commissions on the Press, 1947-49, 1976-77Considering how thoroughly the first Commission examined the questionof the education and training of journalists, and how it placed these secondin the list of objects for the proposed General Council of the Press, ~4 itmight appear strange that the third Royal Commission nearly thirty yearslater had to repeat many of the same kind of comments concerning theneed to raise educational and professional standards. ~ Even moresurprising is the realization, revealed by the third Commission, that theProficiency Certificate of the National Council for the Training ofJournalists, was still optional ~6 for recruits into journalism, especially as thesecond Commission had been told it had been made obligatory. ~7The second report reveals how feeble an institution the Press Council(as the general Council of the Press was called) actually was in its earlyyears, ignoring most of its objects (such as education, research, anddevelopments likely to restrict the supply of information of public interest) ~8and an interesting study could be made of the original aims the first RoyalCommission saw for the Council and its performance since its foundation.Examination of the archive in the National Archives indicates that memberswere divided on the idea of a Press Council, preferring an ’Institute... anunalarming idea ’~9 compared to a ’Council - suggesting a body above thePress, ’6° and fearful that they might create a ’purely professional body, withonly professional functions. ’61 Yet these papers - although obviouslynowhere near a complete archive of the Commission’s deliberations - dosuggest that they did not look to the proposed Press Council to provide theimpetus for the future professional education of journalists. 62The lack of progress in this area can be seen when we read therecommendations of the third Royal Commission, in 1977, that ’advancedprofessional education for journalism should be made a major priority ’63]94MOD100051365