IPSO chairman Sir Alan Moses to continue as head of regulator until end of 2019

Former appeal court judge Sir Alan Moses is to continue as chairman of the Independent Press Standards Organisation for a further two years.

He was appointed to the £150,000-a-year three-day-a-week job in 2014 and his three-year-term comes to an end in September of this year.

IPSO has said he will continue until the end of 2019.

Nearly five years after publication of the Leveson report the issue of press regulation remains far from settled.

Last week former Culture Secretary John Whittingdale MP warned that the current hung parliament could again seek to impose statute-backed press regulation on a reluctant industry.

He also said that IPSO risks losing credibility because of it has yet to use its powers to issue fines for serious wrongdoing.

IPSO was set up by the newspaper and magazine industry and exists outside the parliament-backed Royal Charter on press regulation.

Sir Hayden Phillips, chairman of IPSO’s independent appoints panel, said: “Sir Alan became the founding chairman of IPSO at a febrile time for press regulation.

“Since then IPSO has become fully established as the respected, independent regulator of UK newspapers and magazines. The success of the organisation owes much to Sir Alan’s leadership and integrity. The panel was unanimous and enthusiastic in offering him a new contract”.

Moses said: “IPSO has achieved much in the first three years, but there is more to do. I have been well supported by the Board and Complaints Committee and above all by IPSO’s staff. I am looking forward to reinforcing IPSO’s independence and effectiveness in my second term.”

Comments

4 thoughts on “IPSO chairman Sir Alan Moses to continue as head of regulator until end of 2019”

  1. Brilliant result should send a message to all those non journalists copying and pasting their way way through the working day. Plagiarism is not journalism!

  2. Copyrighting “news” is uncomfortably close to copyrighting *facts*. At what point does it become legally risky to restate basic facts just because someone else has already written about it? I don’t mean to exonerate those who’ll copy an article, change around the phrasing and call it a day. I just want to warn of the apparent slippery slope it presents.

1 2

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

5 × 1 =

CLOSE
CLOSE