Jacob Rowbottom

TO RANT, VENT AND CONVERSE: PROTECTING LOW LEVEL DIGITAL SPEECH

Expression on the internet is now regulated by a wide range of UK laws, including public order laws, media laws and laws that were drafted to target poison pen letters and nuisance phone calls. While these laws were initially designed to regulate different spheres of activity, they now converge and can regulate the same types of digital expression. Digital speakers are now exposed to various legal controls. Recent cases have shown that conversations on social networks and in other forums can be the subject of criminal prosecution and libel actions. While the European free speech jurisprudence has traditionally focused on protecting speech on matters in the public interest, it is argued that these principles do not give sufficient protection to casual conversations and ‘everyday’ expression. This article considers alternative free speech arguments and looks at the case for more proportionate controls on digital expression.

CORRUPTION, TRANSPARENCY, AND REPUTATION: THE ROLE OF PUBLICITY IN REGULATING POLITICAL DONATIONS

This article looks at the public disclosure of political donations as a case study to examine the role of transparency in addressing concerns about undue influence and corruption. The article will explore three issues. The first is to understand what it means to say that a political donation is corrupt. There is considerable disagreement on the ethics of political fundraising and this article will show how public opinion has a role in setting the standards expected of politicians. The second issue is what role the public disclosure of political donations plays in deterring and detecting corruption. While the disclosure requirements were introduced to promote greater trust in politics, it will be argued that increases in transparency have fed a growing culture of mistrust. The logic of the transparency requirements also requires the free public discussion of particular political donations and related ethical issues. The third issue is how that process of free discussion can come into tension with rights to privacy and reputation. The article will explore how the attempts to reconcile the different areas of law both reflect and shape the political culture.

Animal Defenders International: Speech, Spending and a Change of Direction in Strasbourg

This paper looks at the decision of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in Animal Defenders International, in which the Court found the UKs ban on political advertising on the broadcast media not to violate freedom of expression. In addition to examining the Courts reasoning, the paper considers the previous decisions on political advertising, compares the ECtHRs approach to that taken by the US Supreme Court in Citizens United, and outlines the main differences in the dissenting opinions. The final paper will appear in the Journal of Media Law.

Politicians, the Press and Lobbying

The Leveson Report highlighted the extent to which newspapers have lobbied government in relation to media policy, and put forward proposals to make government/media relations more transparent. This article considers whether media lobbying poses any specific concerns in a democracy. In addressing this question, it draws a comparison with political finance and also asks whether lobbying relationships can undermine the watchdog function of the press. The article goes on to consider whether the transparency rules are an effective measure in tackling these concerns, or whether other types of control may be necessary.

The transformation of obscenity law

ABSTRACT This article looks at the number of convictions for a group of offences categorised as obscenity-related in the official statistics. While the aggregate numbers show a dramatic rise, this article examines the trends in relation to the individual offences. The article shows that the law of obscenity has undergone a significant transformation. A central change has been the shift from the publisher as the target for criminal liability to the viewer of the content (for example, through the introduction of possession offences). A further change is the move away from the reliance on broadly worded offences to provisions that target a narrower range of content. Those two changes explain why the number of convictions has sharply increased while the law has become more permissive as to the types of content that can be published. The discussion places these changes into context, looking at the original rationale for the offences and how the interpretation and usage of the legislative provisions has evolved with the system of communication and distribution.

A Landmark at a Turning Point: Campbell and the Use of Privacy Law to Constrain Media Power

This article argues that the decision in Campbell can be seen as a response to long-term concerns about the abuse of media power. After outlining some of the key developments in debates about privacy law, the article considers the features that distinguish the media as powerful institutions. It will be argued that the focus on media power has shaped the doctrine of misuse of private information, for example in expanding the scope of the tort and focusing on the public interest as the main defence. The decision in Campbell arrived at a moment when the communications environment was about to change dramatically. Since Campbell, the use of social media and the opportunities to share user-generated content has given many people the capacity to bring private facts to a large audience. The article will consider whether the Campbell tort remains applicable in the case of non-powerful publishers and looks at the alternative ways to protect privacy.