Dame Janet Smith’s report into culture and practices at the BBC during the time that Jimmy Saville worked there was published this week. Chapter 8 of the report deals with “Media reports alleging that the BBC knew of Saville’s misconduct but had failed to act” [pdf] Continue reading
The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog
Month: February 2016 (Page 1 of 5)
The more that IPSO struggles to appear different from the discredited Press Complaints Commission (PCC) it is supposed to replace, the more it reveals itself to be just the same. In its latest spasm of activity it has announced the appointment of an External Reviewer in the person of Sir Joseph Pilling, a former Permanent Secretary of the Northern Ireland Office. Continue reading
The last few years have seen a gradual process of opening up the Family Courts to greater public scrutiny, partly to comply better with the principle of open justice (that “justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done”) and partly to dispel the notion that justice administered in private hearings must have something to hide and cannot be fully accountable. Continue reading
Once upon a time, the gap between the relatively low supply of something in high demand – timely and trustworthy information – generated enormous profits for news publishers. But over the past 15 years or so, the digital, social and mobile revolutions have all but obliterated that gap. Continue reading
In Galloway v William Frederick Frazer, Google Inc t/a YouTube and others, Mr Justice Horner in the High Court of Northern Ireland refused an application by Google Inc. (“Google”) to set aside an order granting leave to George Galloway to serve proceedings out of the jurisdiction on Google. Continue reading
How do we know when is press regulation good enough? The question is topical because IPSO, the self-regulator established by the big corporate newspapers, has been trying lately to persuade us it can be trusted to do its job. Continue reading
In the case of Ärztekammer für Wien and Dorner v Austria ([2016] ECHR 179) the Fourth Section of the Court of Human Rights held that an injunction prohibiting a doctors’ leader from criticising a company which provided private health care was not an unjustified interference with his Article 10 rights. Despite the public interest in the subject matter, the protection of the commercial reputation of the company justified the grant of interim and final injunctions. Continue reading
In a 2013 Monthly essay Eric Beecher warned of a looming “civic catastrophe” for Australia if the decline of newspapers continued as it had been in the preceding years. The Australian’s report on a Fairfax plan to dump print and go digital-only, as yet unimplemented but convincingly detailed in the leaked 2013 document prepared by management consultancy firm Bain & Co, suggest that such a move is, if not a certainty, highly probable in the foreseeable future. Continue reading
This week former royal butler Paul Burrell has won a high court privacy action against PR agent Max Clifford ([2016] EWHC 294 (Ch)). Mr Burrell said he hired Mr Clifford to prevent negative press coverage but that Mr Clifford betrayed” him by passing on material to Rebekah Brooks at the News of the World. Continue reading
Britain 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. Continue reading
Recent Judgments
© 2024 Inforrm's Blog
Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑