T​he British journalist Michael Leidig has spent eight years fighting for the right to be heard over a false story made by unregulated media bodies about his award-winning and globally respected international agency.

When he sought redress in court, the one-sided stories and social media attacks continued. With no-one to put forward his side of the story, he was denied his day in court when the judges refused to send the matter to trial.

In the past eight years Michael has been on a Kafkaesque journey through labyrinthine complaints procedures where these unregulated media like The Guardian and Buzzfeed insisted they had done nothing wrong.

This is the story about the creation of QC – designed to tackle this one-sided system that is causing irreparable polarisation in society. And this is the story about a regulator that does not wait for the other side to come to the table – a guardian that will now hold the guardians to account.

Q​uis custodiet ipsos custodes? – Who guards the guardians?

The answer is journalists, because we are the only ones that can wield the same power that they can. It is the power used every day by the media with such devastating effect – sadly all too often to attack those that do not share an opinion rather than those that deserve it.

There are regulators that govern the media, yet some of our most respected institutions refuse any form of regulation, and to challenge this is not easy. A guardian of the guardians will have no friends. It will not make you rich, nor will it be easy.

Why am I qualified to do this? I am an award-winning journalist whose work spans short-form and in-depth features, as well as exclusives. I have also worked in television and radio as a presenter and reporter and have written bestselling books. Every day my teams distribute dozens of stories worldwide to some of the biggest names in the business, and have done so for decades. In short, I understand news, the people who make it, and those who publish it.

I am also the vice chairman of special projects at the British National Association of Press Agencies (NAPA), and I created QC to ensure no one has to go through the same ordeal as me, with a committee that answers only to itself and neglects to tell anyone what it decided until challenged. These unregulated players have had the game going all their way for too long.

Tackling this will not be easy, but that is part of being in the game. Because, right now, there is one rule for those who make the rules and another for everyone else. Press scrutiny should apply to everyone.

As the saying goes, a body accountable to nobody should not be trusted by anybody.

I​f you are a victim of the media that is not regulated in any other way, then this is where you start your journey to be heard.

Before we consider your complaint against a publisher, you need to consider whether either Impress or IPSO already regulates that publisher.

What is Media Regulation

You can find a list of publishers they control at here for Impress and here for IPSO.

If your complaint is about a broadcasting organisation, you need to try Ofcom, and if your complaint is about an advertisement, you will need ASA.

If your complaint is about copyright, you need to seek help from IPO.

Complaints about non-UK media will be assessed on a case-by-case basis as the QC service is primarily for UK media.

If you still want to pursue a challenge by using QC, we offer a straightforward, unbureaucratic process:

1. An initial consultation where we will look at the facts and advise you on your options.
2. We then offer arbitration and start the process of investigating whether the article is fair and accurate.

T​o start the confidential process, simply go to our File a Complaint page. You will need to gather information regarding your case, such as a link to the article if it is online plus any useful documents or images as well as a prepared explaination of why you feel you have a case the publisher needs to answer.

There is a GBP 100.00 cost-recovery contribution. This small fee, which would buy you only minutes of the average libel lawyer’s time, helps us to cover some of the costs of a case review.

If you feel that you have been unfairly treated by an unregulated media organisation in the UK, then follow this link to quickly evaluate your case and file an official QC Review.

If, after an initial review, you still want to proceed with QC, our professional editors will look at the complaint and obtain the media organisation’s code of conduct to assess how that applies to the story that involved you.

You will then get the following:

• A report about your case, including whether it was fair, balanced and accurate.
• A review of the organisation complained about its own code of conduct.
• All reviews will be carried out by respected independent news professionals.
• Feedback will be taken from experts, influencers and the public.
• The report will be published on our news wire and sent to a global news network.
• The report will be sent as a press release to media watchers.
• The report will be published on all relevant community news publications.

We charge a single fee of GBP 500 for the main report to be published and a copy sent to you, which will ensure editors are commissioned and paid to do the work, and in some cases, we will provide a partial or complete refund, depending on the circumstances.

If, for example, the complainant has limited means or the investigation is over very quickly, then refunds or partial refunds can be made at the discretion of the QC editor.

Read the QC Code of Conduct here.