Crucial democratic freedoms could be placed in jeopardy if the Coalition Government introduces statutory regulation of the print media, a leading industry body has warned.
David Newell, director of the Newspaper Society, said that, however innocuous sounding such a move might be, it would affect everyone's freedom of expression.
He urged ministers not to respond disproportionately to what he said were the bad practices of less than 1% of journalists.
His comments come ahead of the expected publication later this month of Lord Justice Leveson's report into press ethics, ordered in the wake of the phone hacking scandal.
In his findings, he is expected to recommend greater regulation of the press.
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has already called for the Coalition Government to fully implement the proposals, as long as they were proportionate.
But critics have warned that the effect could be to muzzle the press.
In an article on the issue, Mr Newell said the focus of the Leveson Inquiry had been on "substantially less than 1%" of newspapers and magazines and the journalists that work for them.
He warned advocates of press controls showed scant interest in the impact any legal changes would have on most publications and reporters and the vital roles which they perform.
He said: "Their sense of responsibility and public value are in danger of being taken for granted with the real danger of 'mass punishment' being inflicted on them because of the behaviour of less than 1%."
Mr Newell said it had not been demonstrated more legislation was necessary on top of existing civil and criminal laws and he warned of the damage that could be done by bringing in statutory regulation.
He added: "However softly focused, or innocuous sounding, a statute-based media standards body would impact on everyone's freedom of expression and everyone's freedom to enjoy the words and images which result from that freedom.
"It would require a line to be redrawn by Parliament which would increase the range of media platforms which operate under state-supervised freedom of expression".
He also warned such a move would place Parliament in charge of regulating some media organisations but not others, such as websites.
Mr Newell said: "Put simply, the freedom to publish in the UK is rightly exercised by all sorts of individuals and organisations for a myriad of motivations and all having a choice as to their mode of publication.
"This helps guarantee wider democratic freedoms.
"To target for inclusion in a special statutory regime all those that exercise those freedoms purely on the basis that they have chosen to do so on newsprint or magazine grade paper cannot be justified on any fair evaluation of the evidence presented to Leveson."
Other suggestions to improve press standards included having a member of staff take a minute of editorial conferences and other meetings.
There have been reports that David Cameron could face a Cabinet revolt over the issue if Lord Justice Leveson's report backs statutory regulation.
Last year, Michael Gove, the Conservative Education Secretary, warned the then ongoing inquiry was having a "chilling effect" on press freedom.
In recent days observers have suggested the ongoing allegations against Jimmy Saville, which were first brought to public attention by the press and broadcasters, demonstrate the need for a press free from stringent regulation.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article