By MARK PEARSON Follow @Journlaw
The site – international but with an understandable UK orientation – boasts more than 5,500 followers including 3,500 on Twitter @inforrm.
INFORRM has just listed its Top Twenty Posts of all time (in descending order of popularity):
- Case Law: PJS v News Group Newspapers, Court of Appeal grants privacy injunction – Sara Mansoori and Aidan Wills
- Harassment and injunctions: Cheryl Cole – Natalie Peck
- The cases of Vanessa Perroncel and John Terry – a curious legal affair – Dominic Crossley
- How to avoid defamation – Steven Price
- Case Law, Strasbourg: Von Hannover v Germany (No.2) – Unclear clarification and unappreciated margins – Kirsten Sjøvoll
- Defamation Act 2013: A Summary and Overview – Iain Wilson and Max Campbell
- Social Media: How many people use Twitter and what do we think about it?
- Case Law: OPO v MLA, Shock and disbelief at the Court of Appeal – Dan Tench
- Case Law: ETK v News Group Newspapers “Privacy Injunctions and Children” – Edward Craven
- Case Preview: Jack Monroe v Katie Hopkins, Twitter libel trial about meaning and serious harm
- Case Law: “Spiller v Joseph – the New Defence of Honest Comment” – Catherine Rhind
- Case Law: Iqbal v Dean Manson, harassment by letter – Edward Craven
- The Perils of “Revenge Porn” – Alex Cochrane
- News: Tulisa “Sex Tape”, false privacy turns into true privacy
- Case Law: Gulati v MGN Ltd, A landmark decision on the quantum of privacy damages – Hugh Tomlinson QC and Sara Mansoori
- Case Law: Růžový Panter, OS v Czech Republic: Anti-Corruption NGO defamation case, no violation of Article 10
- La Regina Nuda and Italian Privacy Law – Athalie Matthews and Giacomo Parmigiani
- Case Law: Hayes v Willoughby, harassment defence requires “rational belief” – Aileen McColgan
- Defamation Act 2013: The public interest defence and digital communications – Jacob Rowbottom
From time to time over recent years they have been kind enough to repost my blogs or commentary pieces, including these:
25 11 2013
Where will the new Liberal-National Coalition government led by Prime Minister Tony Abbott head with the reform of media regulation? Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Attorney-General George Brandis were vocal opponents of the former Gillard Government’s proposals to merge press self-regulation with broadcast co-regulation into a new framework.
Privacy in Australia – a timeline from colonial capers to racecourse snooping, possum perving and delving drones – Mark Pearson
13 10 2013
The interplay between the Australian media and privacy laws has always been a struggle between free expression and the ordinary citizen’s desire for privacy. I have developed this timeline to illustrate that tension. Read the rest of this entry »
12 05 2012
The right to privacy is a relatively modern international legal concept. Until the late 19th century gentlemen used the strictly codified practice of the duel to settle their disputes over embarrassing exposés of their private lives.
The first celebrity to convert his personal affront into a legal suit was the author of The Three Musketeers, Alexandre Dumas père, who in 1867 sued a photographer who had attempted to register copyright in some steamy images of Dumas with the ‘Paris Hilton’ of the day – 32-year-old actress Adah Isaacs Menken. Read the rest of this entry »
10 03 2012
The Finkelstein (and Ricketson) Independent Media Inquiry report released on 28 February 2012 is a substantial and well researched document with a dangerously flawed core recommendation.
An impressive distillation of legal, philosophical and media scholarship (compulsory reading for journalism students) and worthy recommendations for simpler codes and more sensitivity to the needs of the vulnerable are overshadowed by the proposal that an ‘independent’ News Media Council be established, bankrolled by at least Aus$2 million of government funding annually. Read the rest of this entry »
9 11 2011
This post originally appeared on the Australian Journlaw blog. It suggests an interesting new approach to media regulation which, as far as we know, has not been suggested in debates in this country. We are reproducing it with permission and thanks to provide a further perspective on those debates.
Australia does not need a media tribunal with regulatory powers to punish ethical transgressions. It already has one – in the form of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (“ACCC”). Read the rest of this entry »
… as well as occasional snippets in their useful Law and Media Roundup section and this review of my book Blogging and Tweeting Without Getting Sued by media lawyer Leanne O’Donnell:
11 04 2012
Mark Pearson’s new book Blogging & Tweeting Without Getting Sued: A global guide to the law for anyone writing online – is very accessible guide to laws relevant to the all those writing online. Read the rest of this entry »
I find the INFORRM “Blogroll” is a particularly useful resource – regularly updated and featuring these media law blogs from throughout the world. Together they provide a wonderful resource for media law students, journalists and researchers. (Thanks for including journlaw.com, INFORRM!)
Surely sufficient bedtime reading for even the most avid media law geek!
Disclaimer: While I write about media law and ethics, nothing here should be construed as legal advice. I am an academic, not a lawyer. My only advice is that you consult a lawyer before taking any legal risks.
© Mark Pearson 2017