Comments for Inforrm's Blog http://inforrm.wordpress.com The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog Thu, 23 May 2013 06:23:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ Comment on New Police Guidance on Relationships with the Media: contacts with the media and “naming of suspects” by "Robin Lupinyo" http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/new-police-guidance-on-relationships-with-the-media/#comment-23619 Thu, 23 May 2013 06:23:44 +0000 http://inforrm.wordpress.com/?p=21357#comment-23619 Why are so few people asking questions about police behaviour?

The reason why it is bad for the press to identify an arrestee is because they may be innocent and never face charges.

But this would be a tiny minority of people if the police only make arrests when they have a strong suspicion of guilt based on some sort of evidence.

It becomes a much bigger issue if large numbers of innocent people are arrested and later released without charge.

In which case – why are the police arresting large numbers of innocent people?

The guidance on keeping arrests confidential may be a good principle to hold to anyway. But if the police are arresting innocent people in large numbers that should be of far greater concern.

]]> Comment on Defamation Act 2013: A boost for free speech, Part 2: Public Interest and Privilege – Timothy Pinto by INFORRM http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2013/05/22/defamation-act-2013-a-boost-for-free-speech-part-2-privilege-timothy-pinto/#comment-23584 Wed, 22 May 2013 08:54:58 +0000 http://inforrm.wordpress.com/?p=21350#comment-23584 This is a matter of your email settings – you need to add us to your “safe senders” list

]]> Comment on Defamation Act 2013: A boost for free speech, Part 2: Public Interest and Privilege – Timothy Pinto by Stuart http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2013/05/22/defamation-act-2013-a-boost-for-free-speech-part-2-privilege-timothy-pinto/#comment-23580 Wed, 22 May 2013 01:25:32 +0000 http://inforrm.wordpress.com/?p=21350#comment-23580 Good Morning Somehow your blog enters my junk mail -which I don’t want it to do as I enjoy receiving it. I tried yesterday to re-subscribe but that doesn’t seem to have improved things. Can you assist?

Kind Regards

Subject to Lawyer-Client Privilege

Stuart Gibson (LLB (Hons), B. App Sc, Accred Spec) Principal GIBSONS SOLICITORS PTY LTD Level 8, 91 William Street, Melbourne, Vic, 3000, Australia http://www.gibsonssolicitors.com.au T: (03) 9620 2088 F: (03) 9629 3938

This email may contain information and material that is subject to confidentiality and/or the laws of privilege. Accordingly, this email may only be accessed and downloaded by the designated recipient. If you have received this email and are not the intended recipient please notify us. Please acknowledge or reply to this email promptly.

]]> Comment on Defamation Act 2013: A boost for free speech – Part 1: Serious Harm, Truth and Honest opinion – Timothy Pinto by Defamation Act 2013: A boost for free speech – Part 1: Serious Harm, Truth and Honest opinion – Timothy Pinto » Alternative News Network http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/defamation-act-2013-a-boost-for-free-speech-part-1-serious-harm-truth-and-honest-opinion-timothy-pinto/#comment-23558 Tue, 21 May 2013 17:29:38 +0000 http://inforrm.wordpress.com/?p=21343#comment-23558 […] Read more… 1,445 more words […]

]]> Comment on Defamation Act 2013: A boost for free speech – Part 1: Serious Harm, Truth and Honest opinion – Timothy Pinto by davidhencke http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/defamation-act-2013-a-boost-for-free-speech-part-1-serious-harm-truth-and-honest-opinion-timothy-pinto/#comment-23555 Tue, 21 May 2013 17:11:54 +0000 http://inforrm.wordpress.com/?p=21343#comment-23555 Reblogged this on David Hencke and commented:
I am reblogging this post because it provides free of charge some vital legal advice from an expert for bloggers who challenge power and authority. It makes it pretty clear that bloggers can now without fear of libel threats be highly critical of private companies who provide bad services to the public. It also makes it tad more difficult for nasty public figures- I am thinking of Barnet councillor Brian Coleman recently convicted of common assault of a member of the public – to bring actions when they acquire a bad reputation. This is good news for free speech, democracy and holding companies and public figures to account.

]]> Comment on Case Law, Strasbourg: Saint Paul Luxembourg SA v Luxembourg, Newspaper protected under Articles 8 and 10 – Hugh Tomlinson QC by Anton’s Weekly International Law Digest, Vol. 4, No. 1 (21 May 2013) | Anton's Weekly International Law Digest http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/case-law-strasbourg-saint-paul-luxembourg-sa-v-luxembourg-newspaper-protected-under-articles-8-and-10-hugh-tomlinson-qc/#comment-23540 Tue, 21 May 2013 04:39:54 +0000 http://inforrm.wordpress.com/?p=21239#comment-23540 […] Saint Paul Luxembourg SA v Luxembourg, Newspaper protected under Articles 8 and 10 […]

]]> Comment on Prosecuting the Media: The DPP’s final guidelines – Alex Bailin QC and Edward Craven by Bribery act for journalists: Cover your chequebook | Paul McMillan http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2012/09/26/prosecuting-the-media-the-dpps-final-guidelines-alex-bailin-qc-and-edward-craven/#comment-23495 Mon, 20 May 2013 09:39:21 +0000 http://inforrm.wordpress.com/?p=17169#comment-23495 […] A more thorough discussion on this can be found here. […]

]]> Comment on Law and Media Round Up – 20 May 2013 by jtownend http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2013/05/20/law-and-media-round-up-20-may-2013/#comment-23494 Mon, 20 May 2013 09:08:37 +0000 http://inforrm.wordpress.com/?p=21336#comment-23494 No problem. Would be interested to read more about your thoughts on ‘counter speech’

]]> Comment on Law and Media Round Up – 20 May 2013 by Robert http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2013/05/20/law-and-media-round-up-20-may-2013/#comment-23492 Mon, 20 May 2013 07:19:09 +0000 http://inforrm.wordpress.com/?p=21336#comment-23492 Thanks for the link.

]]> Comment on Launch of new survey on the legal experiences and views of journalists and online publishers – Judith Townend by johnsmackenzie http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2013/05/14/launch-of-new-survey-on-the-legal-experiences-and-views-of-journalists-and-online-publishers-judith-townend/#comment-23464 Sun, 19 May 2013 19:04:25 +0000 http://inforrm.wordpress.com/?p=21267#comment-23464 Reblogged this on Justice in an Online World and commented:
This caught my attention, as it is perhaps the beginning of what lawyers are likely to see more of in the future. Evidence based decision making. Rather than decisions on justice being driven by anecdotes, decisions will be based on hard data. The ease with which such surveys can be put together (recognising that the analysis is the hard part) suggests that we could and should see more of them.

What would be even more interesting, would be to ask about the expectations, understandings and definitions of a “just” legal process. This would help all policy makers, not just those looking to implement the Leveson proposals, to build a better system.

]]>