UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)

Re-regulation of the print media: implications on press freedom

Brody, A.

Publication date 2013 Document Version Final published version Published in Abstracts: The Constitution of the Public Sphere: the post-Leveson Landscape: WG Hart Legal Workshop 2013

Link to publication

Citation for published version (APA): Brody, A. (2013). Re-regulation of the print media: implications on press freedom. In Abstracts: The Constitution of the Public Sphere: the post-Leveson Landscape: WG Hart Legal Workshop 2013 (pp. 2). Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London. http://ials.sas.ac.uk/research/hart/docs/WGH_2013_Abstracts.pdf

General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).

Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.

UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl)

Download date:02 Oct 2021

INSTITUTE OF ADVANCED LEGAL STUDIES

SCHOOL OF ADVANCED STUDY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON

W G HART LEGAL WORKSHOP 2013

The Constitution of the Public Sphere: The Post-Leveson Landscape

ABSTRACTS

1

Dr Annabel Brody, University of Amsterdam. Re-regulation of the print media: implications on press freedom

Despite the application of neo-liberalist principles and a trend towards deregulation of the audiovisual media, there has been a marked trend towards stricter regulation of the print media in recent years, as reflected in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and reports on freedom of the press such as the Leveson report, Australian reports on media regulation and the report of the New Zealand Law Reform Commission on the ‘new media’. This paper will provide an examination of the ECtHR’s restrictive trends on press freedom, which may be a reaction to the increasingly sensationalist and privacy intrusive activities of the media, which have come to light in particular during the . In Stoll, the Grand Chamber cited the powerful influence of the media of the twenty-first century on public opinion as a reason for an increased need to “monitor” compliance with journalistic standards and as justification for a more limited interpretation of freedom of the press. This appears to be in stark contrast with the Court’s reasoning in the subsequent case of Times Newspaper Ltd v UK in which the ECtHR acknowledges the vital role played by the new media, particularly the internet, in making news and information available to the public. In this case the ECtHR referred to the vital function of the internet in twenty-first century democratic society as an addition to the traditional ‘public watchdog’ role of the press. This could indicate that the Court has seen the error of its ways in Stoll and is now returning to normal course. The Leveson report, Austral reports and New Zealand Law Reform Commission report have all recommended stricter regulation of the print media through, for example, the inclusion of the state as a regulatory actor. Self-regulatory press councils have been widely criticised as weak in that they rely on full co-operation from their members in order to enforce their sanctions. As such, questions have arisen regarding the introduction of backup powers if press council members fail to comply with press council decisions. This paper will consider the pros and cons of the introduction of such measures and the implications of stricter regulation of the print media on press freedom.

Dr Damian Paul Carney, University of Portsmouth Newsgathering and Criminality: A Time for Re-Assessment of Current Privileges, Protections and Defences

The important role that the media plays in a democratic system has resulted in it acquiring privileges (e.g. the requirement that when police are seeking journalistic material they cannot obtain this through usual police searches - see ss9 -14 and Schedule 1 of Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, and Schedule 5 of the Terrorism Act 2000), or being the main beneficiary of general legal rules (e.g. protection of confidential sources), that enable it to perform its ‘watchdog’ and other ‘public interest’ roles. However, it is apparent from the Leveson Inquiry and ongoing police investigations (, Operation Tuleta and ) that a significant number of journalists have been engaged in unlawful activity. The journalists themselves have often used the claim of protection of confidential sources to hide illegal activities, whilst the initial investigation into phonehacking allegations (Operation Caryatid) was hindered by ’s ‘veneer of apparent co-operation’ from seeking production orders of journalistic materials. This paper explores the idea that the special protection afforded to confidential sources and journalistic materials should be limited to acts of journalism which achieve the 2