Media Freedom As A Fundamental Right

Jan Oster develops a coherent theoretical and doctrinal framework for the scope, content and limitations of media freedom.

European Convention on Human Rights – Article 10 – Freedom of expression 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises. 2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary. In the context of an effective democracy and respect for human rights mentioned in the Preamble to the European Convention on Human Rights, freedom of expression is not only important in its own right, but it also plays a central part in the protection of other rights under the Convention. Without a broad guarantee of the right to freedom of expression protected by independent and impartial courts, there is no free country, there is no democracy. This general proposition is undeniable. This handbook is a practical tool for legal professionals from Council of Europe member states who wish to strengthen their skills in applying the European Convention on Human Rights and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in their daily work.

Reimagining press freedom in a networked era: not just a journalist's right to speak but also a public's right to hear. In Networked Press Freedom, Mike Ananny offers a new way to think about freedom of the press in a time when media systems are in fundamental flux. Ananny challenges the idea that press freedom comes only from heroic, lone journalists who speak truth to power. Instead, drawing on journalism studies, institutional sociology, political theory, science and technology studies, and an analysis of ten years of journalism discourse about news and technology, he argues that press freedom emerges from social, technological, institutional, and normative forces that vie for power and fight for visions of democratic life. He shows how dominant, historical ideals of professionalized press freedom often mistook journalistic freedom from constraints for the public's freedom to encounter the rich mix of people and ideas that self-governance requires. Ananny's notion of press freedom ensures not only an individual right to speak, but also a public right to hear. Seeing press freedom as essential for democratic self-governance, Ananny explores what publics need, what kind of free press they should demand, and how today's press freedom emerges from intertwined collections of humans and machines. If someone says, “The public needs a free press,” Ananny urges us to ask in response, “What kind of public, what kind of freedom, and what kind of press?” Answering these questions shows what robust, self-governing publics need to demand of technologists and journalists alike.

The subject of this study is ‘freedom within the press’, the nature and limits of the protection afforded to the journalistic imparting process, which has been a neglected area of research. The analysis draws on the classical defenders of freedom of speech, Milton and Mill, to show that at the dawn of the 21st century the intertwined alliance between big business and public authorities resulting in the widespread phenomena of self-censorship within the media constitutes an almost insurmountable obstacle. Instead of enlightening the public and inspiring the individual the press may be contributing to an inert public and individual cowardice antithetical to the objectives of human dignity and democracy. The core of the problem is that prima facie the infringement of freedom within the media is not exercised on legal premises and cannot therefore be solved within the legal framework. The operation of the press in society is conditioned by three types of regulation, legal regulation, market regulation and self-regulation. Legal regulation does not adequately presuppose the impact of the latter as it is based on the assumption that press freedom is mainly a negative liberty. The book explores the affirmative side of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights to guarantee press freedom that is not merely illusory but practical and effective. Convention jurisprudence has not only influenced the domestic courts of the Contracting Parties but also the legislators of the Member States. In an era of globalization dominant media operators wield power in their own domestic markets to impede national regulators in adopting interventionist media policies to secure journalistic freedoms. The Convention jurisprudence represents a kind of European ius commune, which is here set in the context of an analysis reflecting the problems and values at issue and offering recommendations to alleviate a situation which threatens democratic ideals and public-spirited journalism.

This book examines why press freedom has not become part of the established international human rights debate, despite its centrality to democratic theory. It argues that an unrestricted press is not just an important economic actor, but also an influential power in the political process, a status that interferes with government interests of sustaining their own power and influence. Despite the popularity of ideational explanations in the field of human rights studies, in the case of promoting press freedom, considerations of power and strategic interests rather than ideas dominate state behavior. The author makes the case that the current place of press freedom in the human rights debate needs to be rethought not only in developing countries, but in liberal democracies as well.

"Media Freedom under the Human Rights Act provides the most comprehensive analysis to date of the impact of Article 10 ECHR, as received through the Human Rights Act 1998, on the substantive law governing freedom of expression in the media."--BOOK JACKET.

The media play a crucial role in the protection of human rights. They expose human rights violations and offer an arena for different voices to be heard in public discourse. Free, independent and pluralistic media are a core element of any democracy. However, the power of the media can also be misused to the extent that the very functioning of democracy is threatened. Some media outlets have been turned into propaganda megaphones for those in power. Others have been used to incite xenophobic hatred and violence against minorities and other vulnerable groups. Now the phenomenon of social media presents us with a range of fresh challenges. Blogs, video and social networking sites have become a key forum for political debate and organisation - so much so that they have provoked counter-responses from some repressive states. While there is a need to ensure better protection of personal integrity in social media, the right to freedom of expression must not be undermined. The purpose of this publication is to contribute to a more thorough discussion on media developments and their impact on human rights in a constantly changing media landscape. Eight experts were invited to contribute their personal assessments of trends and problems. They have not shied away from addressing controversial issues or providing far-reaching suggestions. Together their texts indicate that there is a need for stronger protection of media freedom and freedom of expression in Europe today. These are clearly topics of paramount importance which demand serious public debate.