[user104658]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Unlike most Social media the press are governed by an independent body and can and regularly get into trouble fined and have to print retractions etc.



Pretending they are this wild pack of wolves is untrue.





"Following the Leveson Inquiry the Press Recognition Panel (PRP) was set up under the Royal Charter on self-regulation of the press to judge whether press regulators meet the criteria recommended by the Leveson Inquiry for recognition under the Charter. By 2016 the UK had two new press regulatory bodies, the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO), which regulates most national newspapers and many other media outlets, and IMPRESS, which regulates a much smaller number of outlets but is the only press regulator recognised by the PRP (since October 2016). Ofcom also oversees the use of social media and devices in the United Kingdom. BBC reports that Ofcom analyzes media use of the youth (ages 3 to 15 years old) to gather information of how the United Kingdom utilizes their media.



Broadcast media (TV, radio, video on demand), telecommunications, and postal services are regulated by Ofcom





wiki

Pointing out that regulation exists says nothing at all about whether or not that regulation is effective... They get fined, they pay it (its built into their bottom line - they expect it)... They post a tiny one paragraph retraction that no one reads to a story that was a two-page spread and they move on. There are clear examples of it happening time and time again.

You're basically TELLING me that my opinion should be that the UK press is fine, because Wikipedia says so . Thankfully I use my own brain to make decisions rather than wiki pages, so I'm comfortable maintaining my position that the UK press is a heaving pile of toxic trash, written by trash journalists and slobbered over by a trash readership. Might edit the wiki and stick that in there.