Thank you.

Or, say, somebody on Twitter amasses tens of thousands of followers.

It makes sense to me. I guess the ongoing issue that we have with the Internet, and you touched upon with Facebook, is as things -- technology is constantly evolving. Who considers themselves a journalist, who considers themselves a broadcaster, who considers themselves a blogger, the world is changing as these ...

I've heard it's nice this time of year.

No, I understand. And it may well prove to be that this is a very useful mechanism for us to join. But, as I said, it would have to be something that we would look at down the line.

Of course. But all -- I guess something to think of is how many Internet publishers are going to think of doing this, and how many are going to take the opportunity of being, I guess, a global -- a potentially global enterprise and not being part of a regulatory system.

Yes. But it's -- actually I don't think it is even that on the Internet. The servers could be from America.

I could be.

Everything you say is very interesting and it could well be a very useful thing for us to sign up to. With being an Internet product, it would be just as easy for us to, I guess, be published from America or something like that, and therefore perhaps not me ...

No.

Of course.

It's such a grey area, that we don't -- where that line is -- we're trying to find it as well.

No.

We have to balance the 8 and 10 just like everybody else every week, otherwise we get -- we had a privacy injunction against us in 2009, which was up at the Court of Appeal last year, so this does affect us greatly, but I guess what we don't normally ...

Yes.

We know.

Of course.

For us.

That is largely true, but if the story was "Footballer who had built his whole personal brand on being married but was having an affair", that would be a story. "Footballer has affair" wouldn't be a story.

Yes.

"Man has affair" is not necessarily a big story.

Yes.

That would be our attempt. That's what we're aiming for.

I've been watching it more for the press information, I think.

I've been watching some of the Inquiry, but if you would --

Being an Internet publisher is different. We do publish in the UK, but we publish around the world, we have servers around the world, and we try and comply with local law. And therefore the same regulation for magazines and newspapers would probably be -- it may or may not be ...

Mm-hm.

Mm-hm.

Mm-hm.

That hasn't yet happened.

Yes.

It hasn't happened often and not for some time. I think now there are very easy ways for people to get stories on the Internet through social media.

You wouldn't be far wrong.

From the stories involved, I'm not sure it would be a litigation risk, but perhaps they have commercial considerations in newspapers, the subject matter might be something that their editor would not -- would be worried about. Maybe it's politically difficult for them, and therefore if something is out ...

I mean both.

Yeah, you learn not to get things wrong. I think you also learn the value of negotiation and mediation with anybody that makes a complaint as speedily as you can.

This was a story that appeared to come from two very good sources and I wrote it in good faith, but I made a misjudgment and I have to hold my hands up and say that on this occasion this was wrong. But, no, since there there hasn't been ...

It is, yes.

Probably more -- I would have to check, but probably more on the newsletter than the message board.

Very few. I think we've made, to the best of my memory, five to six apologies, so that would be like one every two years.

Yes. What would happen, if somebody made a complaint, we would look at it and act upon it right away. In the witness statement I think I gave examples of when we would be very happy to take off posts.

There are a group of, I would say, long-term users who would help shape the conversation on the message board. It's not moderated as such.

I think that's just how -- as I said earlier -- people use the Internet in a different way.

I would say that people look at things on the Internet slightly differently. Things are written in a tongue-in-cheek manner. You would probably take it differently than if it was written in a national newspaper.

I probably should ask our readers.

From cover to cover, no, but I have read the bits where we have been told it's relevant to us. A lot of the PCC code relates to members of the public and how -- we never cover that kind of story. So those bits I would leave out.

I don't read it every day.

I don't read it every day.

We have -- we take advice from media lawyers, who have at times given us aspects of the code that they think would be relevant to us.

If it was in a public place, in the shop, yeah, that's public domain.