The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog

Month: July 2013 (Page 2 of 5)

The misunderstandings of the Financial Times – Brian Cathcart

financial_timesThe Financial Times has declared qualified support for proposals by national newspaper proprietors for self-regulation that fall far short of the recommendations of the Leveson Report. Its editorial (£) on the subject, however, reveals that this support is founded on a long list of misunderstandings and errors. Below is our analysis, with the words of the FT’s editorial in italics. Continue reading

Huhne and Trimingham, “long lens photos don’t invade privacy” – five bad PCC adjudications

Huhne Trimingham PCCThe Press Complaints Commission (“PCC”) has issued a series of bad privacy decisions on complaints by Chris Huhne and Carina Trimingham against five newspapers about the publication of photographs showing them in the grounds of an open prison.  The PCC found that these long lens photographs of the couple in a private place did not invade their privacy. Continue reading

Media Standards Trust: analysis of proposals for Independent Press Standards Organisation

media-standards-trustOn Monday 8 July 2013 four news publishing associations – the Newspaper Society, the NPA, the Scottish Newspaper Society and the PPA – released plans for a new body to replace the PCC called the ‘Independent Press Standards Organisation’ (IPSO). These plans ‘follow the criteria set out in the Royal Charter put forward by the industry’. In other words, they are based on the criteria in the PressBoF Royal Charter submitted to the Privy Council on 30 April 2013 – not the cross-party Royal Charter passed by Parliament on 18 March 2013. Continue reading

Case Law, Hong Kong, Oriental Press Group v Fevaworks, Provider of Internet Forum is a publisher but has “innocent dissemination” defence

2013-03-26_111713In Oriental Press Group Ltd & Others v Fevaworks Solutions Ltd & Others [2013] HKCFA 47, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal held that an internet forum provider is not like a notice board owner and not a first or main publisher, but qualifies as a subordinate publisher entitled to rely on the defence of innocent dissemination. Continue reading

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2023 Inforrm's Blog

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑