PCC censor Spectator blogger Rod Liddle

The Press Complaints Commission censored columnist Rod Liddle today when it ruled that he had breached its accuracy code following comments he made in his Spectator blog that:

"overwhelming majority" of London's violent crime was carried out by young, African-Caribbean men.

I don't want to focus on the rights on wrongs of what he wrote, I'm well familiar with Liddle's opinions on black youth crime, and have commented on this on my other blog.

I do however think that what he said was wrong. The tone and language he used in the article was crass, insensitive and inappropriate for such a topic.

The issue that's been highlighted for me is one of professionalism, and the standards expected between professional journalists who blog and that of their amateur counterparts.

PCC director Stephen Abell said:

There is plenty of room for robust opinions, views and commentary, but statements of fact must still be substantiated

This is something which I think sets the difference between the amateur and professional journalist/blogger.

There are all kinds of opinions expressed and discussed on millions of blogs. Some statements are true others are false, and many can be offensive.

I agree with the statement from the PCC when their report said.

the "significant ruling" showed publications' websites would be held to the same standards as print editions.

Newspapers and magazines which include blogs on their websites should not be exempt from the PCC code, and I think that this is where the difference lies.

Amateur bloggers do not have any professional codes in which they must comply with. I'm sure if Liddle was just a random bloke spouting his opinions on a personal unheard of blog, we'd all be none the wiser as it wouldn't have received any press coverage.

The simple fact is that as a former editor of BBC 4's Today programme and a columnist in the Times and Spectator, Liddle's views carry more weight and clout, and will attract more coverage.

Liddle is entitled to express his opinions, the question isn't about stifling freedom of speech, but as a high profile journalist there should be no reason to abandon basic journalistic principles just because he is writing his views on a blog and not in print.