Last month was the busiest ever on Inforrm, with over 60,000 page views. We reach another milestone in February, passing 1,000 posts. We would like to thank our readers for their continuing interest in the blog. We would also like to thank all those who wrote for the blog and to remind readers that we welcome posts on media and legal issues from all perspectives.
In addition, to comments and thoughts on current events and recent cases we are also interested in drawing attention to new academic work in our areas of interest. Anyone who is interested in contributing should get in touch at with Inforrm at inforrmeditorial@gmail.com.
We also welcome suggestions from readers on cases or topics which we should be covering and suggestions for re-posts or new links on our home page.
The 10 most viewed new posts in February 2012 were
- A load of hype? The phone hacking scandal may be bigger than we thought – Brian Cathcart
- If a Bulger killer was hacked, how did Mulcaire get his top secret number? – Brian Cathcart
- Opinion: “The Sun has eroded British justice, fairness and freedom: now it is feeling the effects” – Julian Petley
- Media law academic articles round up, the past 6 months – Judith Townend
- Case Law: Von Hannover v Germany (No.2) – Unclear clarification and unappreciated margins – Kirsten Sjøvoll
- News: Cabinet Minister’s 17 year old son gets privacy injunction but not anonymity – Keith Mathieson
- News: “Twitter Joke” Case goes to the High Court – Gervase de Wilde
- Case Law: Růžový Panter, OS v Czech Republic: Anti-Corruption NGO defamation case, no violation of Article 10
- Twitter Libel Actions in Three Jurisdictions – Courtney Love, Chris Cairns, Joseph Meggitt
- News: Axel Springer and Von Hannover – Victory for the Media in the Grand Chamber
Well done Inforrm! You may be missing a few bits, but overall you are the best media law blog in the UK.
It would be interesting to have a post on why none of the witnesses at Leveson from Associated Newspapers were questioned on what is in Nick Davies’ Flat Earth News regarding their newspaper group. They all got off too lightly. If I was a Core Participant, I would have sought to cross examine them on this and a few other matters.
In his chapter titled, ‘Mail Aggression’, Nick Davies says on p. 365, “The first thing to recognise about the Daily Mail is that it is the most successful and powerful newspaper in Britain.” Leveson will be considered a whitewash if the only significant questioning they received was about a ‘plummy voiced woman’ and calling Hugh Grant’s allegation surrounding it a ‘mendacious smear’, as outrageous as that was. Yet, Nick highlights a catalogue of false stories in his book and they received significant mention in the infamous ‘Dark Arts’ chapter.
Am I the only one who thinks they got an easy ride? Liz Hartley even finished with a half hour to spare.