The Law of the Press

Despite great volume of research into press–state relations, we know little about how journalists use information that has been generated through independent bureaucratic processes. The present study addresses this gap by investigating the role of freedom of information (FOI) laws in journalism practice. By surveying journalists ( n = 164), interviewing activists and civil servants ( n = 7) and submitting FOI requests to twenty-one ministerial departments in the United Kingdom, this study explores press-state interactions and the limits of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) application to advance the media’s monitorial function. The results show that journalists perceive FOIA as an essential tool for their work. However, they often described their experience as negative. They reported refusals lacking legal ground, delays, not responding at all or differential treatment. In response to gating access, journalists might also adopt tactics that use loopholes in the law. The press-state interactions, already marked by suspicion, thus, continue to perpetuate distrust. These findings might have implications for journalism practices, FOIAs’ potential for government oversight and democracy. In particular, the differential treatment of requests undermines equality under the law, one of the fundamental democratic principles. The study concludes with several policy recommendations for FOIA reform to meet journalists’ needs better.

Download Full-text

The Law of the Press in Canada (I)

Gazette (Leiden Netherlands) ◽

10.1177/001654926901500203 ◽

1969 ◽

Vol 15 (2) ◽

pp. 105-124

Author(s):

Ronald G. Atkey

Keyword(s):

The Press ◽

The Law

Download Full-text

Penghakiman oleh Pers Nasional: Suatu Kritik atas Kebebasan Pers dalam Pemberitaan Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi

Humaniora ◽

10.21512/humaniora.v5i1.3013 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 5 (1) ◽

pp. 216

Author(s):

Vidya Prahassacitta

Keyword(s):

Social Responsibility ◽

Political Party ◽

Code Of Conduct ◽

High Position ◽

Secondary Sources ◽

Library Research ◽

The Press ◽

Freedom Of Press ◽

The Law ◽

The Government

The 1998 reform in Indonesia has changed freedom press in Indonesia. Now press implements libertarian model which puts freedom first instead of responsibility. Previously, press implemented soviet communist model which put responsibility first instead of freedom. Fifteen years later, press in Indonesia has become political tool by the owner of the press company who has high position in political party participating in the 2014 election. This reflects on the disproportional news regarding corruption cases conducted by the government officer or parliament member from the contender party. Such news delivers not only facts but also misleading opinions to the society which creates trial by the press. In fact, presumption of innocent principle is a foundation for press reporting news as stipulated in Law No. 40 Year 1999 concerning Press and Journalistic Code of Conduct. In libertarian press there are always borders but such borders are not effective since the freedom of press in Indonesia is powerful. Article used qualitative and library research with secondary sources of law to gain a solution to this problem. Therefore, Press Board should maximize its function in supervising the implementation of presumption of innocent principle and to raise society awareness regarding the law supremacy. In the end, to fulfill press social responsibility, a press profession court shall be established to keep press independency.

Download Full-text

‘LESSER BREEDS WITHOUT THE LAW’: THE BRITISH ESTABLISHMENT AND THE DREYFUS AFFAIR, 1894–1899

The Historical Journal ◽

10.1017/s0018246x98007833 ◽

1998 ◽

Vol 41 (2) ◽

pp. 495-510 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

ROBERT TOMBS

Keyword(s):

Political Culture ◽

Prime Minister ◽

The Other ◽

Anglo Saxon ◽

Queen Victoria ◽

The Press ◽

Dreyfus Affair ◽

The Law ◽

The Times

Queen Victoria, her court, the embassy in Paris, the prime minister, and the press, led by The Times, were early and impassioned sympathizers with Alfred Dreyfus and bitter critics of his persecutors. This article traces the development of their views and the information available to them, analyses the principal themes as they saw them, and attempts to explain how and why they formed their opinions. It considers why the Dreyfusard position was so congenial to them. It argues that their own principles and prejudices – conservative, patriotic, Anglo-Saxon, and Protestant – were confirmed by a critique of French political culture, seen as corrupted by a combined heritage of absolutism, revolution, Catholicism, and demagoguery. This appears to be confirmed by contrast with the few dissenting voices in Britain, on one hand Catholic and Irish, on the other, anti-Semitic socialist, who showed little sympathy with the Dreyfusards, and even less with the views of their British supporters.

Download Full-text

Politics, Politicians, the Press and the Law of Defamation

A History of Australian Tort Law 1901-1945 ◽

10.1017/9781108399609.004 ◽

2017 ◽

pp. 51-83

Keyword(s):

The Press ◽

The Law

Download Full-text

Figure 2.8: numbered format of extract 2 1 This is not a battle between the freedom of religion 2 and the freedom of the press; 3 two freedoms which we treasure greatly. 4 This is rather a battle of right and wrong. 5 Has the Daily Mail infringed the plaintiff’s right to a good, clean reputation, 6 or has the plaintiff Mr Orme in all the circumstances no right to any reputation at all in this case because of what he and his organisation have done and do? 7 Was the Daily Mail wrong about its allegations in its article? 8 Was it wrong about its allegations during this case? 9 Or was the plaintiff wrong; 10 was the plaintiff giving a false picture? 11 That is what it is, members of the jury, not a battle between freedom of the press and freedom of religion, 12 but a battle of right and wrong. Looking at Figure 2.8, above, the first two and last two sentences of the extract (lines 1, 2, 11 and 12) form a ‘sandwich’ comprising repetition of the main assertion that the case is not a battle between freedom of the press and freedom of religion. It is as if he is saying that the argument is so because ‘I say so, twice!’. Another example of repetition is found in the structure of the run of three rhetorical questions, both in terms of length and the use of amplification through alliteration: ‘was juxtaposed with wrong’ in lines 7, 8 and 9. The structure of the extract also demonstrates that the judge has the authority to impose that reading of events. For he says, in line 11, ‘This is what it is, members of the jury’. Who is the ‘we’ found in line 3? (a) Is it the royal ‘we’, symbolising the ultimate authority of the court? (b) Is it merely the judge? (c) Does it include judge and jury? ‘We’ is undeniably an inclusive term. It is suggested that, in this instance, the judge is talking in relation to the court and the law, as an official spokesman of the law. The choice of the word ‘battle’, as part of what turns out to be a continuing war metaphor which runs throughout the entire summing up, as a major organising theme that argument is war, is interesting. The word ‘fight’ or ‘skirmish’ is not chosen, but ‘battle’. The reference to battle puts the case ‘high up’ in a hierarchy of modes of physical fighting—for example skirmish, scrap, fight, battle. Battle denotes that opposing armies gather together with their greatest degree of strength to fight for as long as it takes for a clear victor. Of course, it is not unusual to find ‘fighting’ metaphors used to describe English trials. Because of their accusatorial nature (‘He did it judge.’ ‘No, he did it judge.’). Early in the history of English dispute resolution, trial by battle (a physical fight) was used to determine guilt and innocence as a perfectly acceptable alternative to trial by law.

Legal Method and Reasoning ◽

10.4324/9781843145103-26 ◽

2012 ◽

pp. 39-39

Keyword(s):

Freedom Of The Press ◽

Freedom Of Religion ◽

Daily Mail ◽

Physical Fighting ◽

Acceptable Alternative ◽

The Press ◽

History Of ◽

The Law ◽

War Metaphor ◽

Rhetorical Questions

Download Full-text

URGENSI DAN PENGATURAN UU TENTANG CONTEMPT OF COURT UNTUK MENJAMIN HARKAT, MARTABAT DAN WIBAWA PERADILAN

Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana (Udayana Master Law Journal) ◽

10.24843/jmhu.2015.v04.i02.p13 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 4 (2) ◽

Author(s):

Aditya Wisnu Mulyadi

Keyword(s):

Criminal Justice ◽

Criminal Law ◽

Research Method ◽

Criminal Procedure ◽

Court Decisions ◽

Judicial Process ◽

The Press ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Law ◽

Good Attitude

The phenomenon of the Contempt of Court is an event that is rife in Indonesia lately. It is considered to reduce the dignity, majesty and authority of the judiciary and its apparatus. Particularly the dignity and authority of the judge. Attitudes and actions displayed by the search for justice, legal practitioners, the press, political and social organizations, NGOs, academics, judicial commission, as well as various other parties in such a way can be categorized injure the dignity, majesty and authority of the judiciary, good attitude and actions directed against the judicial process, judicial officials, as well as court decisions. Lack of strict legal instruments and adequate to serve as guidelines and benchmarks to judge such a phenomenon is made Contempt of Court always the case. View of the judge is an arm of God would have been contrary to Contempt of Court. The judge in charge of prosecuting and providing justice for justice seekers should not accept the bad treatments. This study is based on normative research method using statutory approach and conceptual approaches. Legislation that used is Law No. 4 of 1985 on the Supreme Court, Code of criminal law, the law book of the law of criminal procedure, the draft book of the Criminal Justice Act 2012 and draft the Code of Criminal Procedure 2012. This research is expected to contribute significantly for the creation benchmarks and appropriate guidelines in terms of the establishment of regulations and legislation on Contempt of Court Act

Download Full-text