Contact

General Enquiries: francine@hackinginquiry.org

Media Enquiries: press@hackinginquiry.org

Victim enquiries  - see below

Fundraising Enquiries: fundraising@hackinginquiry.org

Phone: + 44 (0) 20 3627 9684

Email: campaign@hackinginquiry.org

Out-of-hours Media Contact: +44(0)7554 665 940

Twitter: @HackingInquiry
Facebook: Hacked Off Campaign

Millbank Tower, 21-24  Millbank, SW1P 4QP

 

Victim of press abuse?

If you feel you have been a victim of the press in some wayand would like some advice, please contact us in confidence via campaign@hackinginquiry.org

If you have been a victim (the press have settled a claim or resolved a complaint in your favour) and you may be able to help others who have had the same experience please contact us in confidence via campaign@hackinginquiry.org 

Victim of hacking?

If you have had confirmation you are a victim of phone hacking or other form of illegal information gathering by the press, please contact francine@hackinginquiry.org

If you suspect you might have been targeted and would like to check whether your name is on the list currently being investigated by the Metropolitan Police’s Operation Weeting, please call the Met Police’s non-emergency line, 101.

42 Responses to “Contact”

  1. jeff beresford

    The Press should be free to report facts: they should not be free to make up stories or have any more rights than an ordinary citizen.

    If an ordinary citizen stalks someone,they are committing a criminal offense. If i use a telephoto lens to take pictures of my neighbor in the bath -that is a crime of voyeurism. If, in court, i say that I took the pix because i genuinely believed there was some scandal going on, i would deserve to be convicted immediately.

    So, no, i dont believe in unfettered freedom of the Press at all – especially when it reduces itself to the status of fishwive’s vicious gossip over the garden fence.

    The Press has the power, which it seems to exercise with more and more predatory relish as time goes on, to ruin the lives of people who have done nothing wrong – and when they do, they see no reason to apologize for it until it is beaten almost senseless by public outrage or the threat of its coffers being plundered.

    They are above the law – and that is far more dangerous and anti-democratic than enforcing decent behavior on the Press.

    I am CERTAIN that if I hounded any of the editors or politicians who defend the total freedom of the Press, they would do everything n their power to have arrested, charged and silenced. I do not think even their wardrobes are free from the rotting corpses and skeletons of their own making.

    • Vernon Stclair Williams

      How do you create a society of sexual abuses and at the same times instilling fear and supporting revalation 3:9 in the courts?
      simlpe, you get seclected social workers and the police to arrest 15 families in the same area with accusations of sexually abusing thier chrildren, the next step is to get the propaganda machine “The Press” to daily bombard the country of the event with implied psychological remarks such as, if this is occurring in one area could it be happening all over? (food for thought) the effects would be mothers would become suspicious of their spouse, father`s would feel un-easy kissing or having their daughter sitting on their laps, of course, none of the 15 families would be charged and their chrildren will be united with them, but the seeds of such info remains embedded into the consciousness of man,( an example is evident here where a child escape from it`s push chair and cross a busy road, now it is spontaenous instinct to assist tthat child, the one gent who could of done so refused for not wanting to be seen as an abducter or molester, )the next step is to make the sinisterism a reality, this is done by mostly women with the same mind set to make wild accusations of sexual molestation, to seduce and then cry rape,the most disgusting side to this is in using sexual actice under-age girls (some pretending to be )to do the same, it would not be suprising if half the male population dont have a so-called crimal record or has been questioned on such, Of course, there rapists and child molesters, but certainly no where near the epidimic potrayed by the press, and why do they realease people who abduct and molest chrildren of innocence? and then give out their names and addresses,
      Here is a senario that shows clearly why to some it is important to build societies based on negtivities…You visit a friend, un-known to you she`s had a dispute with her spouse or whot-ever that`s negtive, on opening the door you instinctively sense something is not right, in denial, she will later confirm your feelings to be acturate, A couple visits a torture chamber, void of any apperatus, closed for a 1000yrs, and they have no knowledge of it`s existence, on entry, both would feel un-easy, she being more sensitive will say: “I dont like being here, it`s eerrie or something to that effect”, what we have here is three people using mind capacity of 10-15-18%, and yet, their emotional bodies can produce such awareness, now image they are those who uses 70-100mind capacity, negative thoughts and actions would be explosive to them, ladies and gents, this is how they nourished themselves, without it they cannot exisat, or at least not in an invoirment of love, peace and harmony, so please tell me why would they shackle the press or for that matter the the world`s media, and if they did, would it make a difference?
      ” I am the ultimate experience”

      • Vernon Stclair Williams

        A document dated 1979 says: Experience has proven that the simpliest method of securing a silent weapon and gaining control of the public is to keep them un-disciplined and ignorant of the basic systems principles on one hand, while keeping them confused, dis-organised and distracted with matters of no real importance on the other hand…this is acheived by:(1) disengaging their minds, sabotaging theirt mental activities, providing a low quality program ofd public education in mathemathics, logic, systems, design and economics, and discouraging technical creativity….(2): engaging their emotions, increasing their self indulgence in emotional and physical activities by:(A) unrelenting emotional affrontations and attacks by way of a constant barrage of sex, voilence and wars in the media, especially the tv and news papers….(B) giving them what they desire in excess, junk food for thought, and depriving them of what they really need…(C) Rewriting hiostory and laws, and subjecting the public to the deviant creation, thus, being able to shift their thinking from personal needs to highly fabricated out-side prioriyies, these preclude their interest in , and discovery of the silent weapons social automation technology, the general rule is that there is profit in confusion, the more profit, the more confusion, then the best approach is to create problems, and then offer solutions….

  2. jeff beresford

    call me paranoid- but i posted my last comment.. and my antivirus software warned me that it had detected a threat of malware…????? Is the site being hacked?

    • Nicci

      Hope I Don’t have to change my email again but this hacking has made me quite the IT expert

    • Malcolm G

      I get the same sense of paranoia here too. AVG will NOT let me sign the petition, even when I disable the anti-virus software…
      Is AVG trying to stifle a bit of popular free speech, or has someone hacked into/bypassed their server so as to actively stop the voting process such that it is no longer deemed ‘newsworthy’?

  3. Stephen keen

    After working in media for 15+ years I would like to see a system where ever individual at birth automatically owns the copyright to their own image and no one can use it without your consent. I think that would be a great idea and prevent a lot of problems with false reporting and stigmatism by association and help a lot with invasion of privacy/stalking issues.
    Best regards

  4. Chris Roberts

    Dear Hacked-Off Team ….,

    I suffered at the hands of the media when they published only what can be described as pure lies about me …., these only escalated when they realised I was not in a financial position to sue …., so the more scandulous the stories became and the more newspapers they sold.

    I feel the approach to Leveson is totally wrong …., the context appears to be “How do we react to the Media, when they do something wrong” …., instead of …., “How do we stop them from behaving badly in the first place”.

    Also there is no reference to the vast majority of people who are defamed by the media and CANNOT afford to sue the newspapers for libel.

    I do believe there is a solution …., which avoids regulation.

    All Newspapers are Limited or Public Companies. If a system of UNLIMITED Punitive Damages were introduced in the UK …., then there would be no need for ANY new legislation. A new raft of No-win / No-Fee Solicitors would ensure that there was TRUE EQUALITY FOR ALL …., whether the Individual sleeps under the arches of Waterloo Station or catches the train above to Weybridge and St Georges Hill.

    The Newspapers would then no-longer behave in such a cavalier and derogatory way without any thought or care for their victims, if they believed that they could be sued for £10 – £20 million in damages, potentially bankrupting them.

    I believe this position is a ubiquitous one …., who can object to it ??? ….., we are not looking to curb the freedom of the press just their abuses.

    If you would like to discuss my personal experiences or comments above, then feel free to contact me …., thank you for taking up this heavy and cumbersome chalice on behalf of everyone, regardless of our creed or wealth.

    We can still influence the outcome of this once in a generation opportunity to right a terrible wrong.

    Chris Roberts
    07711004034

  5. Anne Bissell

    Dear Mr Grant, I thoroughly enjoyed the Channel 4 documentary this evening. Thank you for your commitment to this fundamental principle of a free press achieved by reporters governed by common human decency and not by engineering stories for policical or unreasonable financial gains whatever the human cost. I am a Registered General Nurse and am very tired of hearing second hand from patients about what they have read (usually in the Daily Mail or Telegraph) most recently about The Liverpool Care Pathway and how allegedly Doctors and nurses collude to prematurely end a patient’s life to clear hospital beds! I suggest your Group pushes for a reforendum on this matter if the Prime Minister hasn’t the wit to change matters. Kind regards and very best wishes, don’t become cynical. Anne.

  6. cyrus semmence

    Hi,

    Not sure if this is the right channel for my comments, if not sorry and please point me in the right direction.

    I’d just like to say I thought Hugh Grant put on a good fight on Channel 4 News last night, but felt he did push the point on his opposite number hard enough that regulation is not about curbing freedom of speech it is about controlling corporate manipulation of the media.

    It is now becoming clear that this is the strategy the mainstream media is going to adopt is to scare the general public away from supporting regulation. There strategy is to put themselves forward as the defenders of this sacrosanct right and any legislation is an attack on this fundamental right. As you well know this is not the case and I’m not trying to teach you to suck eggs, but we need to be forceful in rebuffing people who come on the tv and basically lie to support their cause as David Price was.

    Hugh Grant is very articulate and nice, but David Price needed to be put in his place more firmly!

  7. Peter Guegan

    I wish you well with your campaign, and would be glad to read your newsletters.

  8. David Edwards

    One argument I cannot believe is that statutory regulation would silence the press & allow cover cups. The world has changed, twitter, wiki leaks & access to foreign press sites printing pictures and naming spys means whether we like it or not the press is no longer the source of information. Cover ups are more difficult as does sifting the truth, but above all information can no longer be controlled in a modern technologically advanced country.

    I think this point needs to be advanced against this myth of a rubicon that once crossed will prevent access to information that contradicts the rich and powerful.

    • Christopher Hutchings

      No to statutory regulation and censorship. Stop Hacked Off shackling a free press.

  9. TrevorMorgan

    If Cameron is against controls over the press when can we expect legislation ending D notices and a repeal of the official secrets act?
    He’s bought he’s paid for and he’ is as useful as chocholate fireguard

  10. Ed Straw

    Start demanding proper corporate governance at Newscorp and the Daily Mail & general Trust. Both these companies are public companies, owned by shareholders. But they use Voting and non-voting shares to maintain control by Murdoch and by Dacre/rothermere. Murdoch would not have the power he does if all shares carried votes, as in every other major corporate. Given Newscorp performance over the past decade he would not be chairman nor probably even on the board

    Campign to eliminate non- voting shares in any UK media owner and the dictatorial control they give to the psychologically flawed.

  11. Ed

    I watched Graham Foulkes yesterday being interviewed on BBC breakfast. His son was killed in the 7/7 bombing and he was on of the people who had his phone hacked. His response was the most thoughtful, balanced and fitting response I have seen from anyone in this case. He has distanced himself, quite rightly in my view from the Hacked off campaign as he feels it has been turned into a celebrity circus and people would remember it because it involved Hugh Grant and Steve Coogan and would more than likely forget its purpose. In spite of this he is against any regulation of the press. It’s typical in my view that people with a left leaning tendency are the ones, it seems to want press regulation. They believe in being liberal but only when you agree with their views.

  12. Duncan

    Is your petition working properly? I added my name last night and there must be millions really angry but you only show less than ten thousand signatures! You aren’t being hacked are you??

    Mr Cameron should have stipulated from the outset that there were Rubicons which could not be crossed and saved Lord Leveson’s time and taxpayers money, which has been ENTIRELY wasted. Mr Cameron is a disgrace to our country.

  13. Concerned

    I’m sorry but I think your campaign is totally misguided and dangerous.
    The campaign appears to be unduly influenced by overpaid celebrities who have been caught doing something they wished they hadn’t been caught doing (Hugh Grant & Max Moseley spring to mind)..
    I have nothing to do with the press & have no vested interest except that I think a Free Press is vitally important.
    The thought that the Press being under the control of politicians is utterly terrifying.

    • Mark S

      Let’s remember that one element of the ‘free press’ to which you refer was found to be breaking into mobile voicemails of everyone from murdered teenagers and bomb victims to celebrities. This is not under dispute given the publisher appears to be trying to reach out-of-court settlements with many of those affected.

      This is nothing more than the most recent incident of malfeasance and ‘hacking’ appears to have become a pervasive standard operating procedure for lazy and intrusive journalism.

      If the UK press want to be considered a responsible profession, maybe they should behave as one: for starters, the publishers and the Chartered Institute of Journalists (CIoJ) should work on a interwoven set of principles that would see publishers forced to employ editors and senior journalists that have been duly accredited by CIoJ and who have a complete knowledge of and regard for ethical standards. Once everyone understood how important it was to embrace principles and not let them go once they became inconvenient, maybe everyone would start to respect journalism again.

  14. Richard Micklewright

    Your petition is confusing me: your site says there are over 16000 people signing up at the moment yet when I go to the official e-petitions site the only Leveson e-petition has a mere 200 signed up. What is the correct situation? Is the one on the official government site your petition or someone else’s? I hope that you succeed but you need to be clear if people are to get behind you.

  15. Mollie Hance

    Are you the same as 38 degrees? I have just made a donation and hope that it comes to you. If you are not the same organisation, I am worried and feel conned. I went through what I thought was the hacked off website.

  16. Adrian Braddon

    There can be little worse than being unfairly treated by a media group whose interests appear far removed from the dissemination of the truth and the public interest. Complaints are futile and the self serving self regulation a totally stupid “ball (d)acre” and wholly incompatible with a fair and civilised society. Freedom of speech does not and has never meant freedom to harm. This sadly is what the tabloid press appear to want and the political wimps have not the intelligence or interest to understand. Keep at this ‘guys and girls’ and recover and secure the country we all love!

  17. David bowden

    Dear Hacked Off

    It looks as though Cameron again is maintaining the old status quo based on fear of being disapproved of by the media.
    And of course above all else one must not rock the boat instead of above all ese I want to see things differently. Now at this stage I would like to draw attention to the fact that governments and the press do not have inerrant power, power is given them by us the populace, so if we come together with a unified objective we have the power to change ………..
    The underlying factor to all the decisions that were made by the editors and that for some reason cannot be remembered, were based on financial motivation at how much money it would make the paper, regardless of who is hurt on the way. I should therefore like to make a suggestion to Hacked Off. That us the public can show our distaste for how the papers have conducted themselves by having a day where we abstain from buying any newspaper. This will perhaps show to the media there are enough out here that feel this strongly about this situation. For those that are not interested will continue to buy their papers as normal. This will be a strong indication of just how satisfied or appalled by the conduct of the press the public are. It need not stop there, we could have a no newspaper week if we felt it was needed,but I feel that it would never get to that point for there would be too much money at stake. Keep up your good work, it is the time of change, David

  18. Rob Morgan

    Why does anybody actually need a newspaper in this day and age? I hope that hacked off will assist the speedy decline of the entire UK gutter press which has no place in a civil society. I hope hacked off will also focus some attention on the BBC which has become little more than the media arm of the labour party in recent years, and far from using licence fees to produce programmes worthy of public broadcaster status peddles filth like ‘Eastenders’, which beyond doubt has promoted anti-social behaviour among Britain’s enormous and burgeoning underclass. Well done Chis Jeffries and Hugh Grant

  19. Clare Dennis

    David Cameron is playing a dangerous game. By blocking legislation – ANY legislation – it looks for all the world as though he is more concerned about press support for him and his party than about press freedom.

    There could be no clearer illustration of why effective regulation is needed. Have unelected press barons become so influential over successive British governments that we are afraid to pass a law designed to enshrine true freedom of the press? If that isn’t a threat to democracy, I don’t know what is.

  20. PFJ Oliver

    The PM said if the Leveson recommendations were not ‘bonkers’ he would implement them. The reasons for not implementing them put forward by the industry do seem ‘bonkers to me. Here’s a few.

    Building on David Edwards’ point regarding the impact of statutory regulation, the argument put forward by the industry is that whilst the recommendation put forward by Leveson in itself is not dangerous, it’s the slippery slope – crossing the rubicon, as the Prime Minister puts it.

    But this really is a ‘bonkers’ argument. Parliament, if so inclined, can put legislation through, given a parliamentary majority and approval by the Sovereign. Therefore, the argument works both ways, if it thought a previous administration had behaved unreasonably it could always repeal legislation as well legislate to impinge press freedom.

    The direction of travel doesn’t have to be one-way. Moreover, at least this would mean policy is in the open and not done through back door deals with powerful proprietors and editors.

    Lord Justice Leveson’s report included an example of the risk of hidden agendas: Cable was biased and couldn’t deal with the BSkyB deal, Hunt was entitled to an opinion. It is hard to see the difference. Apparently one is only entitled to an opinion if it is in agreement or does not upset the sensibilities of a proprietor.

    If it’s all the same with you, Mr Cameron, I would rather be governed by someone I can vote out if I don’t like them than a newspaper editor or proprietor.

    The argument that social media cannot be regulated in the same way is equally ‘bonkers’. Just because we can’t stop the flow of guns between countries doesn’t mean we don’t control the proliferation of nuclear weapons. I seem to remember we sent young men and women to war on this point?

    Whose journalism do I think is better the broadcast media or newspapers? Campaigning journalism by the BBC, ITV and Sky continues even with regulation. It is surely ‘bonkers’ to say statute has limited their activities in a way that threatens free speech.

    Even the extreme’s of broadcasting are sensible compared to the rabid excesses of newspapers. The argument that people can chose to buy a newspaper is right. Circulation is falling that’s true, but perhaps this isn’t new technology alone. The quality of the press may also have something to do with it and perhaps statute might apply indirect pressure to improve it and help circulation?

    Keep it up Hacked Off!

  21. Neil Jopson

    May I make s suggestion and that is instead of allowing Sir Brian Leveson’s recommendations to be called”"Leveson’s Law”, with permission you start referring to it as “Millie’s Law” or even “Maddie’s Law”.

    I am sure that this far more emotive term would attract attention that the Press would find it hard to denigrate.

  22. John O'Sullivan

    If as seems to be clearly the case statutory underpinning was never going to be acceptable to this Conservative Government then the terms of reference given to the Inquiry should have honestly and openly reflected this. Either the Inquiry was therefore set up on a false premise or minds have (been) changed since irrespective of the recommendations it has made. Whichever is the case both are fundamentally dishonest.

  23. Alex Cater

    Over the years there have been many heroic citizen campaigns to fight for freedom in this country.

    But I’m not sure there has ever befroe been a campaign to fight for the beginning of the end of free speech. Shame on you.

  24. Mr Gart Norton

    Don’t do this!! I disagree entirely with your petition. It’s against our constitution and the Magna Carta and smells of fascism, Nazism and Islamism.

  25. Ivan Ratoyevsky

    Its completely obvious to any reasonably intelligent person that a so called “Free Press” is NOT worth a jott, morally or otherwise. The press & media have abused time & again the condition of a free press, the press & media CANNOT be trusted NOT TO exploit or abuse a free press. Stricted press & media regulation is now required urgently, one that removes politicians & media barons from inteference. My point is a free press HAS already failed & has been seen to fail badly, why shouldnt we have a much more regulated press? IMO those people (like David Cameron & Boris Johnson et al ) who squeele the loudest about press freedom are those who have already sided with the press barons, & media mogals.

    Its about time the press was a little less free because it cannot be trusted any further than it can thrown IMO. Plus there are serious questions for the police to answer in regard to press abuses too.

  26. Nicci

    It’s not just phone hacking its emails too facebook accounts msn ive had the lot but i havent got thousands to hire anyone ti prove it or accuse them as they are to coward to use their real name from me and thousands like me THANKYOU

  27. stellateddy

    I would like to know what the real goal is of this well~ organised campaign. Could it be good old fashioned press censorship by the left? Gerry McCann and JK Rowling? Are you having a laugh?

  28. Alan Roper

    Good Evening,

    You have the law. Did those who have been examined over this inquiry act outside or inside of the law? If it was outside of it, then there already is facility to stop illegal and unlawful activities.

    Regulation will bring more laws, but what possible benefit will that bring if the current laws, that should be enforced, are not being used?

    State regulation of the press does not sit right with me.

    Regards,

    Alan.

  29. Mike Hubbard

    Just one small thing – after signing the petition the site went to “email your MP”, and it said my MP was Tony Lloyd (Manchester Central). But he isn’t MP any more, he’s the new Police Commissioner. I don’t know who the new MP is (but at a guess it is whoever the Labour candidate was in the election last month).

  30. Marcus Lavin

    Press Standards – A Unique Opportunity For The National Interest

    The obvious solution post Leveson for the national interest is to establish a fresh approach to ensure a fair, equal and democratic balance to redress the negative actions from the press barons / proprietors, media insiders and politicians.

    In this country we have a public service broadcaster, I propose we direct the increasing strength of public support through the” Hacked Off Campaign” to get the BBC to actually work for the NATIONAL INTEREST. I have already contacted the BBC and the Prime Minister with my ready to go action plan proposals for a fresh, unique alternative television debate programme.

    The positive impact resulting from my programme proposal, will continually improve the standards demanded by the general public rather than have the politicians and the media players arrogantly manipulate the news media industry with only their one sided perspective.

    With the BBC working in partnership with its customers the general public, in such a balanced way to strengthen their own level of service as well as adopting this innovative approach will in itself begin to restore the trust and public confidence of the people in a fairer and democratic society. Both working together and investing in the right people with the right ideas at the right time to deliver positive improvement outcomes through this outlet of opportunity to challenge, scrutinize, improve and hold to account for example rogue newspaper journalists, editors and press barons.

    This shift in emphasis will change the dynamic within the media industry and will turn the tables on the newspaper sector through peer pressure forcing them to rethink their business culture and profit driven strategy to make the necessary changes to comply with, rather than abuse their code of conduct for professional practice.

    Following his meeting today David Cameron wants the newspaper editors to develop their own strategy for self regulation by Thursday 06.12.12 but I have already issued my post Leveson strategic proposal to David Cameron, this just demonstrates how the “power brokers” arrogantly continue to play their “power game” talking only to each other rather than adopt due diligence and consider all available options, to deliver the best available solution and in so doing exercise compassion for the victims by doing the right thing for those sickened by the phone hacking scandal.

    My proposal stands up for the interest of the general public and focuses on fairness and positively improves the standards of performance from those in public life, by empowering free speech, creative ideas and forward thinking business case solutions working for the general public compared against what we have at present where maximizing profits for newspaper barons through bad practice, misconduct and negligence is not only allowed but probably encouraged.

    My television debate programme proposal will strengthen the “Hacked Off Campaign” and deliver our mutual interests and will gain greater impact by working together but more importantly will have a ready made action plan to be directly compared against the one due from the newspaper editors this Thursday, to show there is an alternative way forward and if nothing else will demand an explanation from David Cameron to justify his decision.

    For more information visit http://www.publicpolicydebates.co.uk or show your support on Twitter @newpolicyreform

    Good luck with your campaign.

  31. George

    Could any celebrity explain how political censorship of the press will enhance freedom of information in what is alleged to be a democracy, and if the same celebrities are unhappy with press coverage of their lives and lifestyles, why don’t they use the courts to exact financial retribution?

  32. Henry Gewanter

    As the person responsible for exposing the MPs’ expenses scandal a few year ago, I know only too well the difficult choice between our right to privacy and our right to free speech. It’s a troubling and important issue, but although I feel for the victims of press abuse, I can’t help feel our right to a free press outweighs the right to privacy.

    There are, undoubtably, some terrible cases of suffering at the hands of the press, but most cases are merely embarrassing – and to celebrities who court publicity otherwise. Having made millions from ‘selling’ themselves to the public, I’m less sympathetic to their claims for privacy when it suits them. Most other cases involve ‘fat cats’ or politicians – two other groups I have less sympathy for than the general public – who are, in any case, protected by law.

    The laws are already in place – they just need better enforcement. So I say, let the press “publish and be damned” – or at least sued if they get it wrong.

    A free press is just too important to give up, it protects whatever other rights we still hold. So I will not be signing the petition – and urge you all to think again.

    Kind regards,
    Henry

    Henry L Gewanter
    Managing Director
    Positive Profile Limited