In today’s Independent Media Weekly, Glover writes in part:

If Sir Christopher Meyer is made to resign, that would give comfort to the
opponents of an independent Press Complaints Commission and the supporters of
government supervision of the media. A minor embarrassment might have been
removed, but at the cost of a major concession to the enemies of a free press.
Sir Christopher has given an irrevocable public undertaking that he will never
write about his tenure at the PCC, and that should be enough. Throwing him now
to the wolves would do far more harm to the PCC than letting him get on with his
job.

My reaction: Huh? Did the ‘enemies of the free press’ corner Meyer and force him to create this controversy while at the same time insisting he remain head of the PCC? He can resign or be sacked by his board without endangering the UK’s press freedoms. Puh-lease.

In any case, what is meant by ‘press freedoms’ in the U.K. is that the newspapers who are members of the PCC agree to abide by the PCC’s code of conduct. The papers also agree to participate in, and abide by the results of, complaints alleging breaches of the PCC’s code. Importantly, the complaint proceedings cannot order compensation, but usually require the adjudication be published. And a newspaper can withdraw from the PCC at any time.

That’s it. No magic there and particularly no magic that Sir Christopher Meyer holds in place by his mere presence. And the system is not completely self-regulatory. There are many formal legal constraints on the UK press, such as the Human Rights Act, the Official Secrets Act, etc.

Whether or not Meyer should step down is an interesting question, and one where reasonable people can disagree. But I don’t think his situation has anything to do with press freedoms.