Why news outlets should think twice about republishing the New Zealand mosque shooter’s livestream – Colleen Murrell

16 03 2019

Like so many times before with acts of mass violence in different parts of the world, news of shootings at two Christchurch mosques on Friday instantly ricocheted around the world via social media. When these incidents occur, online activity follows a predictable pattern as journalists and others try to learn the name of the perpetrator and any reason behind the killings. Read the rest of this entry »





Media companies on notice over traumatised journalists after landmark court decision – Matthew Ricketson

12 03 2019

A landmark ruling by an Australian court is expected to have international consequences for newsrooms, with media companies on notice they face large compensation claims if they fail to take care of journalists who regularly cover traumatic events. Read the rest of this entry »





The DCMS Select Committee’s proposals for social media regulation: would they work? – Emma Goodman

1 03 2019

The DCMS Select Committee’s new report is the result of an 18-month inquiry into Disinformation and ‘fake news’ which received 98 written evidence submissions (including one from me and my colleagues outlining the report of the LSE Commission into Truth, Trust and Technology) and oral evidence from more than 50 individuals. Read the rest of this entry »





Journalism vs Churnalism: The push for “quality marks” in online news – Zoe McCallum

26 02 2019

Within a week of one another came two reports on the future of journalism in an age of big tech: The Cairncross Review (on 12 Feb) and The Commons DCMS Committee Final Report into Fake News and Disinformation (14 Feb – but with its excoriating criticism of Facebook, anything but a Valentine to Mark Zuckerberg). Read the rest of this entry »





Could Cairncross help public interest law reporting? – Judith Townend

24 02 2019

On the surface, the Government’s launch of a review into the sustainability of journalism was commendable but cynical onlookers were dubious from the outset. Given the fraught history of media policy-making and the large commercial media groups’ impressive lobbying clout, would smaller players be heard and would the review make recommendations that served a genuine public interest in the free flow of ideas and information? Read the rest of this entry »





European Data Protection and Freedom of Expression After Buivids: An Increasingly Significant Tension, Part Two. The Analysis – David Erdos

22 02 2019

The outcome in Buivids draws significantly on long-standing CJEU jurisprudence.  Thus, as far back as 2003, Lindqvist had already stressed the broad material applicability of data protection in an online publishing context and also argued that the personal/household exemption was not applicable where “data are made accessible to an indefinite number of people” (at [47]). Read the rest of this entry »





European Data Protection and Freedom of Expression After Buivids: An Increasingly Significant Tension, Part One. The Decision – David Erdos

21 02 2019

On 14 February 2019 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) handed down its decision in Buivids, a case which pitted an amateur individual online publisher against the Latvian Data Protection Authority (DPA). Read the rest of this entry »