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.proprietors had begun, as if there was a concerted take-over bid forascendancy by this new group. With the expertise of these new membersthe Association quickly became the Institute of Journalists, complete withRoyal Charter listing the introduction of an entry examination among itsaims.With the change of name to the Institute came a change in entryexamination proposals. What the average 16 year-old could reasonably beexpected to answer became something more complicated. The ability towrite clear, accurate English, with a test of general knowledge, becamesomething else: more a general education designed to transmit a basicstore of knowledge upon which the trainee journalist might graft otherspecialisms. It can be interpreted as either a far-sighted move to providethe journalist of the future or as a determined effort to institute dramaticchanges in the calibre of the profession by imposing entry requirements toa degree which might exclude many of those already employed asjournalists.So there is a distinct correlation between the changing power basiswithin the re-named Institute and the kind of entrant specified in thecurriculum for the entry examinations. The kind of general knowledge thejournalist is deemed to posses is defined: knowledge of Euclid (Appendix II)enters the arena; Latin, French and mathematics, history, geography, ’factsin English literature’ (at a time when Oxbridge did not attempt to define, letalone teach, it.) The change of content is an indication of intention to shapethe future of journalism. That is one conclusion. Another interpretation isthat this can be seen as a final attempt by the managers of the press tofight off the revolution that journalists, apparently, were anticipating (as A.Arthur Reade had indicated): an attempt to fight off the curse of the ’newjournalism’ which would change the political map of press power. That itwas increasingly seen in this light by working reporters could well be acontributory factor in the eventual dissatisfaction that led to the formation,in 1907, of the National Union of Journalists by dissident Institute members,and others.The feelings of such members can. only be surmised when looking at thenext, 1893 syllabus (Appendix I11) which introduced further examinations forMembers, indicating the determination to push the Institute that way, ifpossible. Subjects which the 16 year-old would have had little chance oflearning in the State education system of the time, constitutional andpolitical theory, appeared. The ordinary reporters seemed to be forgotten,or relegated, to ’Division II a’ codified ’Special Certificates’ which ’generalreporters’ might sit. Yet this designation does not appear as a grade ofmembership in the Institute.This scamper after qualifications also involved seeking exemptions forordinary examinations obtained in schools, and elsewhere, so that, by1908, nine English and a further nine Welsh, Irish and Scottish paperqualifications were recognized as exemptions from the Institute’s ownexams. It is as if the search for respectability (or status) rendered theInstitute prostrate in front of any qualification. Yet ordinary members wroteletters commenting that they had never once used any Euclid in thirty yearsof journalism. It is difficult to know how to assess the value of all this5?MOD100051228