It was the thirteenth week of evidence at the Leveson Inquiry. As Natalie Peck reported for Inforrm here, the Inquiry heard from former Times in-house lawyer, Alastair Brett, crime reporters and senior figures from the Metropolitan Police force, including head of press Dick Fedorcio. Continue reading
The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog
Year: 2012 (Page 47 of 60)
On 15 March 2012 the Ministry of Justice Published its first statistical report on privacy injunctions, covering the period August to December 2011. The report showed that only 4 new privacy injunctions were granted during this 5 month period. None involved the media. In addition, there were 3 hearings for the continuation or variation of interim injunctions. Continue reading
Last week was Week 13 of evidence at Leveson Inquiry. The Chairman heard from several crime reporters and more senior figures from the Metropolitan Police force, including head of press Dick Fedorcio (pictured), who has been heavily referenced in the evidence of others over the past two weeks. The last witness of the week was former “Times” in house lawyer, Alastair Brett. Continue reading
Is
the Finkelstein Report as dangerous as the media imagines? Richard Ackland looks at the major recommendations as well as some of the darker arts of journalistic practice not even mentioned in the report
Judging by mainstream newspaper reaction, Ray Finkelstein and Professor Matthew Ricketson are proposing a government funded monster to regulate every corner of Australia’s media. Continue reading
Ryan Giggs has lost his claim for damages against News Group Newspapers (“NGN”). In a judgment published on 2 March 2012 ([2012] EWHC 431 (QB)) Mr Justice Tugendhat refused to reinstate the footballer’s claim for damages against NGN on the grounds that Giggs had been party to two serious breaches, one of the rules of court, the other of an Order of Mr Justice Eady of 20 April 2011. Continue reading
Thanks to the Leveson inquiry, the British media system and news-gathering practices have been the subject of extensive public discussion and debate. Yet, little attention has been given to how favourably our system – even with all its flaws – compares to those in other countries. Through a project supported by the Great Britain China Centre (“GBCC”), Chinese academics and judges have been looking to our jurisdiction for guidance on how to protect Chinese media and journalists. Continue reading
The BBC’s Top Gear is no stranger to controversy. Renowned for its irreverent brand of humour, comments on the show have landed the BBC in hot water on more than one occasion. But while they often occupy the headlines, such incidents have rarely ended up before the courts. The recent Tesla v BBC case ([2012] EWHC 310 (QB)) is a notable exception. Continue reading
Once a rough trade in self-serving but criminogenic information was elevated to the more noble, although self-appointed, task of ‘holding people to account’ in ‘the news of the screws’ and the media more generally, it was inevitable that political careers, and lives generally, would be destroyed by a barely regulated industry of censure and slur. In turn, that meant that powerful and very public people would become more professional in protecting their power, image, position and livelihoods. It led to an outbreak of libel suits just as night follows day. Continue reading
The Leveson Inquiry urgently needs to break open the Motorman files – not least because they might reveal how phone hacking really worked
Few news outlets reported in detail the evidence of Alec Owens, an ex-policeman and former Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) investigator who gave evidence to the Leveson Inquiry about Operation Motorman and its aftermath. They should have. Not simply for the light it shed on the practices and ethics of newsgathering, but because his evidence – and the Motorman Files he discussed – might provide the key to how phone hacking worked. Continue reading
On 2 March 2012, in Tamiz v Google Inc, Google successfully challenged the English court’s jurisdiction to hear a libel claim against it founded on comments posted to a blog hosted on its Blogger platform. Mr Justice Eady held that Google was not a publisher of the comments, even after notification of the complainant’s objections. Continue reading
Recent Judgments
© 2026 Inforrm's Blog
Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑