Search

This article looks at transgender media representations from the aspect of press regulation which is so far under-researched. Placing the analysis within the fragmented post-Leveson UK press landscape, it examines the two UK press watchdogs' provisions relating to transgender reporting. The study evaluates IPSO's and IMPRESS' editorial standards through the lens of queer legal theory, offering a fresh perspective on the key role of these bodies in establishing (trans)gender 'outsiders' and 'insiders' in the ongoing trans rights debate of which the press forms a key part. It is argued that, although both regulators have taken steps to tackle trans-discriminatory reporting, IMPRESS' approach seems to strike a more constructive balance between freedom of expression and trans people's rights than IPSO. The paper concludes by making recommendations for both press regulators to address the complexities of trans issues and tackle the discursive harm of transgender media 'othering' more effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Under-investment in public service journalism has led to growing interest in the possibility of philanthropic support for the sector. Though long associated with non-profit journalism in North America, there is little tradition of philanthropy in UK journalism. This paper explains how recognition of public interest journalism as charitable can be achieved through more constructive interpretations of the existing law. Despite its initially conservative response, the Charity Commission has recently taken important steps towards recognising defined forms of journalism as charitable under the existing law. This paper reviews the democratic imperatives fulfilled by public interest journalism which justify such developments; and seeks to demonstrate how this framework for defining public interest journalism aligns with the public benefit requirement in charity law, opening up the possibility of new forms of charitably funded 'public benefit journalism'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article addresses the application of the journalism exception in UK data protection law. A number of uncertainties arise out of the case law of the CJEU and UK courts, as well as from the changes made to the journalism exception in the new data protection regime under the GDPR and DPA 2018. Three areas within the journalism exception will be discussed: the meaning of 'journalistic purposes', the substantive exemption from liability, and the procedural power to obtain a stay of proceedings. This article will identify the uncertainties affecting each of these three areas, and proposes possible ways by which these uncertainties may be resolved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, a number of high-profile privacy cases involving children have come before the English courts. This article draws on developments from ‘PJS v News group, Weller v Associated Newspapers’ and ‘Murray vExpress Newspaper’. In these cases, the courts considered concepts of welfare and well-being when balancing a child’s article 8 right to privacy with the article 10 right to freedom of expression for the media to reporton matters involving or affecting children. The article argues that by contrast, press regulation and its enforcement sometimes lag behind legal developments. The article draws on comparative research of fifty-seven press codes from press regulators around the world to identify patterns and gaps in ethical press standards regarding the representation of children. The article recommends ways to enhance the relevance and robustness of press regulation to better protect and promote the rights and interests of children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author discusses the court case Scott v. Scott in Great Britain, which deals with the freedom of media to report legal proceedings. Topics include the open justice principle which is considered as sacrosanct in some Commonwealth jurisdictions, the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR)'s Article 6 which entitle everyone with a fair and public hearing, and the open justice principle's balancing with the rights that are guaranteed by the ECHR.

The article focuses on the obstacles and opportunities in building trust in press regulation. Among the topics discussed include the aspects of regulatory scheme recommended by Lord Justice Leveson, the promotion of promoting high standards of journalism, and development of trust in the willingness of the press to follow public expectations on the standard of reporting.

The article focuses on underpinning an independent system of press self-regulation proposed by Lord Justice Leveson in Great Britain. Among the topics discussed include absence of press freedom in Burma or Zimbabwe, new regulatory body to replace the discredited Press Complaints Commission (PCC), and conception of Leveson of press freedom.

The article offers information on the Royal Charter for the press. Among the topics discussed include the framework proposed by Lord Justice Leveson for press regulation in Great Britain in November 2012, cross-party draft Royal Charter, second version was an industry draft Royal Charter published by the Press Standards Board of Finance (PressBoF). It highlights the aspects of rival Charters' framework such as complaints, sanctions and arbitration.

The article discusses the validity of the arguments presented by Professor Gavin Phillipson regarding the effective protection of Article 8 rights in Great Britain. It says that the positive, legal requirements' imposition on media organizations to notify earlier the subjects of the stories of journalists where these might encroach on purported Article 8 rights is not needed in order that the Great Britain fulfills its European Convention obligations. It mentions the basic premise that damages are not enough to recompense harms done through the private information's publication or the interim injunction in privacy cases. It examines the practical implications of the imposition of prior notification requirement and its effect on media freedom.