British press-monitoring would go too far

[Commentary] Britain’s diverse and highly competitive newspapers are generally more freewheeling, uninhibited and populist than their U.S. counterparts. They also tend to cross more lines. Last year one of them was caught hacking into the cellphones of celebrities and other news subjects, including a missing girl who was later found dead. Though the paper, owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., was later shut down, the government launched a wide-ranging investigation, led by a senior judge, into the industry’s practices. The perhaps inevitable result is a lengthy report and a series of dangerously overreaching proposals. Lord Justice Brian Leveson’s report recommends, among other things, that Parliament pass a law setting up an independent body to regulate the press that would be empowered to impose fines of up to $1.6 million and mandate the publication of corrections or retractions by newspapers. Though the members of the panel would not be politicians, a state agency that currently regulates radio and television would be charged with assessing its work. If Judge Leveson had his way, newspapers could also face restrictions on protection of sources and access to information, and even a limit on the circulation any one paper could have. These ideas are, to begin with, deeply impractical.