Press regulation: three reasons why a 30 year old campaign must continue – Steven Barnett

19 01 2017

National NewspapersWith the government’s consultation on whether to proceed with the section 40 cost-shifting incentives of the Leveson framework now closed, there will be a brief political pause. Neither that consultation nor the intense political manoeuvring that is likely to follow should distract us from the long-standing and urgent need to tackle reform of press regulation in order to protect both the public and public interest journalism. Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements




Where now for media reform in the UK? – Damian Tambini

11 01 2017

Damian_Tambini_4489 cropped

The Leveson Catch 22: responsibility for delivering tough regulation of the press and a new framework on media ownership lay with a Parliament and a government that reformers agreed was under the boot of the press and therefore unlikely to deliver them.  Leveson himself worried about the ‘megaphone’ with which the press could influence policy debate. Read the rest of this entry »





The Risks of Abandoning Leveson – Martin Moore

6 01 2017

Lord Justice LevesonHow will Theresa May’s government decide whether to implement Leveson after the current consultation closes? It appears to be inclined to dilute or abandon the court costs incentives and Leveson Part Two – otherwise why launch the consultation in the first place? Read the rest of this entry »





How Brexit might affect EU audiovisual media services policy making – Alison Harcourt

25 05 2016

AVMSD 1160 x 650In light of the replies to the public consultation on Directive 2010/13/EU on Audio-Visual Media Services (AVMSD), the Commission’s Regulatory Fitness (REFIT) exercise, the public consultation on the EU Satellite and Cable Directive, national consultations and a possible exit of the UK from the EU, it is time to consider the current issues affecting UK stakeholders in the cross-border audio-visual services sector. Read the rest of this entry »





Data protection through the lens of competition law: will Germany lead the way? – Inge Graef and Brendan Van Alsenoy

24 03 2016

germany-1177268_1920_fullOn 2 March 2016, the Bundeskartellamt, the German competition authority announced its decision to initiate proceedings against Facebook on suspicion that the social network provider had abused its dominant position by infringing data protection rules.  This case represents the first attempt by a European competition authority to integrate data protection interests into competition analysis, and raises interesting questions about the interface between these two areas of law. Read the rest of this entry »





A very brief history of interception in Britain – Bernard Keenan

21 02 2016

gchq1Britain is in the process of legislating a new system of control over the interception of communication. The Investigatory Powers Bill, currently being debated in draft form, aims to give an unprecedented level of transparency and accountability to the use of government surveillance powers. In this ‘long read’ piece Bernard Keenan provides some historical context on the issue of interception, arguing that the more the law oversees secret activities, the more secretive the law becomes. Read the rest of this entry »





Holding the “sovereigns of cyberspace” accountable – Rebecca MacKinnon

20 11 2015

DigitalIn 2014, more than 213 million people around the world went online for the first time. According to Freedom House, which tracks trends in Internet freedom and openness around the world, these new users have less freedom to speak their minds, freely access information, and organise around civil, political, and religious interests than those who first logged on five years ago. Read the rest of this entry »