Suchergebnisse

The Lee Myung-bak government's response to the sinking of the South Korean warship Cheonan in March 2010 was a hard-line policy that met with widespread public doubt and criticism. His conservative government reacted to critics with suppression of free speech and use of state power to control the media. As a result, international ratings of press freedom and Internet freedom for South Korea were downgraded. The government relied on national security rhetoric; however, its primary legal tools were not the National Security Law but rather criminal defamation and broadcasting and Internet regulations. I discuss some factors that make South Korean democracy vulnerable to erosion of press freedom, including the enduring influence of the Cold War, fragility of liberalism, and the lack of executive constraints. (Asian Perspect/GIGA)

The United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 proclaimed a vision of freedom of expression exercised regardless of frontiers. Nonetheless, laws and norms regarding the freedom or limits of expression are typically established and understood at the national level. In today's interconnected world, where newfound threats to free expression have suddenly arisen, how can this fundamental right be secured at a global level?This volume brings together leading experts from a variety of fields to critically evaluate the extent to which global norms on freedom of expression and information have been established and which actors and institutions have contributed to their diffusion. The authors also consider ongoing and new challenges to these norms, from conflicts over hate speech and the rise of populism to authoritarian governments, as well as the profound disruption introduced by the internet. Together, the essays lay the groundwork for an international legal doctrine on global freedom of expression that considers issues such as access to government-held information, media diversity, and political speech. As the world risks renouncing previous commitments to the freedom of expression, Regardless of Frontiers serves as a timely reminder of just how much is at stake and what needs protecting

Preliminary Material /Clemens Nathan -- Introduction: Freedom of Expression and the Media /Merris Amos , Jackie Harrison and Lorna Woods -- Free Speech, Communication and the State /Thomas Gibbons -- Imposition or Empowerment? Freedom of Speech, Broadcasting and Impartiality /Steven Barnett -- Impartiality in News Coverage: The Present and the Future /Mike Feintuck -- Packaged Voices: A Case Study on the Mediation of Minority Voices (Asylum Seekers) on Television News /Bernard Gross -- The Council of Europe's Standards on Access to the Media for Minorities: A Tale of Near Misses and Staggered Successes /Tarlach McGonagle -- User Generated Content: Freedom of Expression and the Role of the Media in a Digital Age /Lorna Woods -- Freedom of Expression: The BBC and User Generated Content /Jackie Harrison -- What Has Human Rights Law Done for the Media? /Merris Amos -- Fighting Words—the War on Terror and Media Freedom /Peter Noorlander -- Conclusion: Utilising a Human Rights Framework /Merris Amos , Jackie Harrison and Lorna Woods -- Appendix /Merris Amos , Jackie Harrison and Lorna Woods -- Index /Merris Amos , Jackie Harrison and Lorna Woods.

The Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards 2004 honouring the outstanding contributions of six men and women to free speech, creativity and freedom of information were presented on 22 March at London's City Hall. The judges also singled out one more individual as 'censor of the year'. The judges were Monica Ali, Geoffrey Hosking, Mark Kermode, Ann Leslie, Caroline Moorehead, Nitin Sawhney, and Ursula Owen and Judith Vidal-Hall of Index.

Must privacy and freedom of expression conflict? To witness recent debates in Britain, you might think so. Anything other than self-regulation by the press is met by howls of anguish from journalists across the political spectrum, to the effect that efforts to protect people's privacy will threaten press freedom, promote self-censorship and prevent the press from fulfilling its vital function of informing the public and keeping a watchful eye on the activities and antics of the powerful.[Brown, 2009, 13 January]1 Effective protections for privacy, from such a perspective, inevitably pose a threat to democratic government via the constraints that they place on the press.Such concerns with privacy must be taken seriously by anyone who cares about democratic government, and the freedom, equality and wellbeing of individuals. But if it is one thing to say that privacy and freedom of expression cannot always be fully protected, it is another to suppose that protections for the one must always come at the expense of the other. After all, the economics of contemporary politics and journalism would seem to be partly responsible for our difficulties in protecting personal privacy while sustaining robust and informative forms of public discourse. [Moore, 2010, 10 -141]2 Most newspapers are loss-making businesses and the need to reduce those losses and, if possible, to turn a profit, make investigative journalism an increasingly expensive proposition as compared to both "comment" and more or less elevated forms of gossip. At the same time, politics has increasingly become the prerogative of a narrow group of people with access to the large sums of money necessary successfully to compete for high office. In those circumstances, the need for critical scrutiny is as important as it is difficult.Revising our ideas about privacy and its protection cannot alone reduce the tensions between freedom of expression and personal privacy typical of our societies, necessary though such revision may be. Moreover, this paper can only ...