Friday, 18 December 2015

Future regulation of on-demand programme services

Future regulation of on-demand programme services | Ofcom: "From 1 January 2016, Ofcom will be sole regulator (other than in relation to advertising) for on-demand programme services ("ODPS") under Part 4A of the Communications Act 2003 (the "Act").

This document summarises, for the convenience of providers and consumers of ODPS, arrangements which apply from that date.

We have collated links to forms for notifying services to Ofcom (and related guidance), as well as Rules and Guidance applying to ODPS, Interim Breach Procedures for investigating breaches of rules for on-demand programme services ("Interim Breach Procedures"), and Sanctions Procedures.

 This document also consults on two substantive proposals. One is to introduce new Procedures for investigating breaches of rules for on-demand programme services to replace the Interim Breach Procedures, and to align more closely with the position for linear television broadcasting. The other is not to charge fees under section 368NA of the Act." 'via Blog this'

Sunday, 29 November 2015

Caesar’s Wife and Sports Journalism – When is Close too Close?

Caesar’s Wife and Sports Journalism – When is Close too Close? | DropInPitch: "There are now [2012]  22 Sun journalists who have been arrested as part of Operation Elveden, investigating corrupt payments to public officials. At the Sun from its inception, paying for news was the way the newsroom did business: the public were invited to sell stories by ringing the newsdesk. It is one thing to suborn a public official – but arguably quite another to agree a £300 tip fee to a soldier or prison officer. Nobody warned journalists at the time that what was seen as ‘doing one’s job’ might be illegal." 'via Blog this'

Tuesday, 5 May 2015

Sunday, 19 April 2015

TV ‘exposure’ of Scientology halted by UK libel law split | World news | The Guardian

TV ‘exposure’ of Scientology halted by UK libel law split | World news | The Guardian: "Sky originally indicated that the Alex Gibney-directed film, which alleges abusive practices at the religion’s US headquarters, would be transmitted in the UK earlier this month in step with its American release.

However, the Observer has learned that because Northern Ireland is not subject to the 2013 Defamation Act, the broadcaster could be exposed to libel claims from David Miscavige, the leader of the church, or others. This appears to have caused the company to postpone transmission, if not to cancel it entirely.

 For technical reasons, Sky is unable to differentiate its signal between regions, rendering the same programme potentially exposed to pre-reform libel laws in Northern Ireland, but shielded in Britain where, among free-speech safeguards and reforms designed to limit frivolous claims or “libel tourism”, people or organisations must now show “serious harm” to reputation. Sky called the decision a delay rather than a cancellation, but did not deny it was taken for legal reasons." 'via Blog this'

Don’t prosecute journalists who pay for public-interest leaks, says ex-DPP

Don’t prosecute journalists who pay for public-interest leaks, says ex-DPP | Law | The Guardian: "The Crown Prosecution Service will now offer no evidence in the cases of nine journalists, who include Coulson, the former editor of the News of the World, and Clive Goodman, the paper’s former royal editor, who were awaiting trial.

 The prosecution will continue of a further three Sun journalists: Chris Pharo, head of news, and district reporter Jamie Pyatt who both face a retrial after a jury failed to reach a verdict earlier this year, and Anthony France, the paper’s crime correspondent.

The decision to drop the cases came after a review forced on the CPS by an appeal court ruling last month that questioned prosecutors’ use of the charge of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office – an ancient common-law offence – to pursue the journalists.

 The new CPS guidelines state that where journalists are involved with corrupt police officers, there would be a “high public interest” in prosecuting. But for journalists who deal with other types of officials, such as prison guards, the harm to the public interest in corrupt payments may be “finely balanced” against the lack of harm caused by the resulting stories.

In these circumstances, the prosecution of journalists “may not always be in the public interest”." 'via Blog this'

Tuesday, 24 March 2015

Coroners and Justice Act 2009: abolishing criminal libel

Coroners and Justice Act 2009: "Section 73 Abolition of common law libel offences etc:  The following offences under the common law of England and Wales...are abolished—

(a) the offences of sedition and seditious libel;

 (b) the offence of defamatory libel;

 (c) the offence of obscene libel" 'via Blog this'

Wednesday, 4 March 2015

Telecasting Dec 16 gangrape documentary would make media appear voice of perpetrator: I

Telecasting Dec 16 gangrape documentary would make media appear voice of perpetrator: I: "Invoking provisions of Rule 6 (1) (d, e, f, i, k and o) of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994, the I&B ministry has “advised” all private satellite channels “not to telecast the documentary” or “any excerpts from therein” or “any programmes based on these excerpts”. The ministry has also stated that “any violation of the Programme Code shall invite such action as provided for in the Cable TV Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 and Rules framed thereunder as well as the terms and conditions stipulated in the uplinking/downlinking guidelines”. The I&B advisory has gone on to state that the “excerpts also contained his chauvinistic and derogatory views regarding women in general and the victim in particular” and that “these programmes also provided a platform for the convict to use the media to further his own case, especially when his appeal against his conviction, is sub-judice”.

Wednesday, 4 February 2015

When satire incites hatred: Charlie Hebdo and Article 10 speech

When satire incites hatred: Charlie Hebdo and the freedom of expression debate | Strengthening Journalism in Europe: Tools, Networking, Training: "The European Court’s refusal to rule on the cartoons notwithstanding, its existing caselaw does provide clear direction. Its guiding principle is simple and plain: the right to freedom of expression means that democratic societies need to be able to discuss current affairs and issues that concern us all, and we need to accept that some of us hold strong opinions. That’s what tolerance and pluralism is all about.

Inciting hatred against individuals simply on grounds of their religious beliefs oversteps the line; but satirising violent extremists within a religion is part and parcel of democratic society.  Satirising a religion as such should also be permissible so long as any insults aren’t entirely gratuitous; but the line is crossed when hatred is incited against specific individuals on the grounds of their religious beliefs. That constitutes hate speech.

This means that cartoonists have every right to satirise Islamic fundamentalism, an issue that has dominated public debate ever since the early 2000s." 'via Blog this'

Tuesday, 3 February 2015

‘Toothless’ press regulator is a busted flush, but genuine post-Leveson reform is still on the way

‘Toothless’ press regulator is a busted flush, but genuine post-Leveson reform is still on the way : Democratic Audit UK: "Since he started last September, Sir Alan Moses has committed himself to demanding changes from the RFC’s rulebook, hinting at resignation if they fail to deliver. He told the Lords select committee that “many of the rules – this awful collection of rules and regulations – are opaque, sometimes self-contradictory, difficult to understand and sometimes difficult to find”.  The rules on investigations, he conceded, “require a large amount of red pencil”.

Precisely how many changes he was demanding, in what terms, and within what timescale remain unknown. Despite Sir Alan’s repeated commitment to transparency, nothing has been made public.

 It is now clear, however, that Sir Alan will be getting short shrift from the RFC. When its chairman Paul Vickers appeared in front of the committee a week later he was unequivocal: “When Sir Alan says he’s going to put a red line through a whole load of things, he can’t.” " 'via Blog this'