{"title":"Impartiality in United Kingdom broadcasting","authors":"T. Gibbons","doi":"10.1080/17577632.2022.2092170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Television service providers in the UK are required to preserve due impartiality as respects all matters of political or industrial controversy and matters relating to current public policy. In RT v Ofcom, in a judicial review of the regulator’s decisions that the Russian owned television station RT had breached the rules, the Court of Appeal upheld the regulator’s application of the rules and rejected claims that it should have taken account of the balancing effect of a ‘dominant media narrative’ and of RT’s other programming. The court also rejected the claim that the enforcement of the impartiality regime was an infringement of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, holding that the regulator's action was necessary in a democratic society in the interests of the protection of the rights of members of that democratic society in general and the viewers of RT in particular. This comment discusses the case and its implications.","PeriodicalId":37779,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Media Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Media Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2022.2092170","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACT Television service providers in the UK are required to preserve due impartiality as respects all matters of political or industrial controversy and matters relating to current public policy. In RT v Ofcom, in a judicial review of the regulator’s decisions that the Russian owned television station RT had breached the rules, the Court of Appeal upheld the regulator’s application of the rules and rejected claims that it should have taken account of the balancing effect of a ‘dominant media narrative’ and of RT’s other programming. The court also rejected the claim that the enforcement of the impartiality regime was an infringement of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, holding that the regulator's action was necessary in a democratic society in the interests of the protection of the rights of members of that democratic society in general and the viewers of RT in particular. This comment discusses the case and its implications.
期刊介绍:
The only platform for focused, rigorous analysis of global developments in media law, this peer-reviewed journal, launched in Summer 2009, is: essential for teaching and research, essential for practice, essential for policy-making. It turns the spotlight on all those aspects of law which impinge on and shape modern media practices - from regulation and ownership, to libel law and constitutional aspects of broadcasting such as free speech and privacy, obscenity laws, copyright, piracy, and other aspects of IT law. The result is the first journal to take a serious view of law through the lens. The first issues feature articles on a wide range of topics such as: Developments in Defamation · Balancing Freedom of Expression and Privacy in the European Court of Human Rights · The Future of Public Television · Cameras in the Courtroom - Media Access to Classified Documents · Advertising Revenue v Editorial Independence · Gordon Ramsay: Obscenity Regulation Pioneer?