Notes from the last law lecture of the term, which will cover the main points we have learnt.
1. Legal framework in the U.K
- Criminal and civil courts
- Criminal: state vs. individual (prison sentence if found guilty)
- Civil: disputes between organisations or individuals (i.e libel cases)
- Crown courts: cover indictable offences (carry sentence of 5+ years)
- Magistrates courts: summary offences (carry sentence of 5 years or less)
- Sometimes an offence can be seen as either indictable or summary, which is known as an 'either-way' offence funnily enough!
2. Court reporting
- Stage 1: After incident - report what happened (no danger)
- Stage 2: Warrant issued/someone arrested (case is active, kind of!)
- Stage 3: Police lay charges
- Stage 4: Trial
At stage 3, here are the uncontested things that you can report
- Name and age
- Address and occupation
- Charge(s)
- Date and place of Crown Court hearing
- Bail and legal aid conditions
- Names of counsel
REMEMBER: Prejudice leads to contempt, so be careful what you report and when you report it.
- During trial: no reporting when jury is not present.
3. Libel and defamation
REMEMBER: PUBLICATION + IDENTIFICATION + DEFAMATION = LIBEL
DEFAMATION is a tendency to...
1. lower individual(s) in the estimation of right thinking people
2. cause them to be shunned/avoided
3. disparage them in their business, trade or profession
4. expose them to hatred, ridicule or contempt
Libel defences
1. JUSTIFICATION: "It's true and I can prove it"
2. FAIR COMMENT: "This is my honestly held opinion based on the facts"
3. ABSOLUTE PRIVILEGE: court reporting
4. QUALIFIED PRIVILEGE: police quote, council meetings etc
Reynold's defence
- In basic terms, a journalist can be let off if the defamatory remarks are seen to be in the public interest.
- If you come to your conclusions after practising 'responsible journalism' (i.e - kept notes, diaries, recordings), your defence will be enhanced.
4. Privilege
- Read my notes from the privilege lecture.
5. Copyright
- In simple terms, copyright laws are in place to protect intellectual property that belongs to an individual.
- News organisations (print and tv) have an agreement to use a certain proportion of each other's material, such as sport highlights. This is known as fair dealing.
"Pictures courtesy of..."
- To give another example, if a paper picks up an exclusive, rivals are allowed to publish that information
- Same applies for internet/online material.
Read my notes on copyright.
6. Privacy and confidentiality
- WIKILEAKS SAGA! Perhaps the biggest breach of confidence story ever.
Three areas of concern. Do not report...
1. state (official) secrets (e.g - matters that may hinder home security)
2. commercial secrets
3. facts about somebody that they would prefer to remain private
Matters that fall under the public interest can often excuse breaching confidence of sources.
Read my notes on privacy and confidentiality.
Ian Anderson's media law extravanganza canceled due to adverse weather conditions!
This week's lecture was on codes of practice.
The main point about following the codes - as they are not actual laws like defamation - is that it helps to maintain a level of trust between you and the audience.
Three main bodies
1. PCC (Press Complaints Commission)
2. Ofcom: statutory body, covers broadcasting as a whole
3. BBC: has a code of its own (mainly because it is funded by the license fee)
EXAMPLE: Queengate row - led to Peter Fincham's resignation.
Why do codes matter?
1. guides us through ethical issues
2. how far to go on a story
3. guides us to do legitimate practices
4. makes us aware that circumstances can make a difference (i.e. - is it in the public interest?)
Key areas
1. ethical behaviour
2. fair treatment (e.g. - respect for privacy)
3. accuracy and impartiality (e.g. - your political affiliations should not be explicit, especially in broadcasting)
4. protecting vulnerable groups (e.g. making sure children aren't identified via jigsaw identification etc)
CODE ONE: Press Complaints Commission (PCC)
Often seen as the weakest code as it ultimately promotes self-regulation. In effect, this gives publications the license to 'make their own rules'
- Deals with 1000s of complaints per year
- Can force publications to publish apologies off the back of complaints. Always something journalists want to avoid
- A public interest defence can often override the need for a printed/broadcasted apology
- The code is still fairly effective, despite its apparent weakness
CODE TWO: Ofcom
Seen as a lot stronger than the PCC as it actually has statutory powers. Ofcom can fine an organisation up to £5.6m
EXAMPLE: BBC Radio scandal involving Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand
Ofcom can...
- order companies not to repeat programmes
- order a correction or apology to be broadcast
- impose fines of up to 5% of revenue
- take away broadcasting licenses
Ofcom is hot on 'undue prominence' (politics). Coverage of parties has to be proportional to seats won or who has a majority. For example, WINOL covers a constituency held by the tories, so we feature that MP (Steve Brine) more than anybody. If WINOL starts to include UKIP or the Greens etc weekly on the bulletin, this would not be tolerated by Ofcom.
Impartiality is also an interesting area. It is strongly required for all broadcasters, but newspapers are allowed to subtly show their affiliation. The idea is that buying a paper is a choice, where as the tv bulletins are often there whether you like it or not.
CODE THREE: BBC Editorial Guidelines
The BBC Editorial Guidelines serve a dual purpose: to act as a manual working document to judge complaints to it and as a general guide for journalists.
It is a useful reference tool, set up lie an encyclopaedia, covering everything fincluding:
- violence in the news
- publish taste
- electoral law
- reporting of war/terrorism
More notes on Freedom of Information. This time we had the pleasure of Brian's expertise.
The essence of FOI: The public have a legal right of access to any piece of of information held by public authorities because they pay their taxes.
100,000 FOI requests are submitted every year. It costs around £34m to answer that number.
Anybody can send an FOI request. In fact, only 12% are sent by journalists.
EXAMPLE: Kingsnorth Climate Protest (August 2008)
- Initial statement: 70 police injured
- After FOI request: 12 police injured, only 4 seriously
Journalists believe this is the 'golden era' of FOI.
When can they say 'no'?
If it costs more than £600 to find out the information.
(£450 for smaller organisations)
Other exemptions
ABSOLUTE: Security, intelligence, court records etc
QUALIFIED: e.g. - ministerial communication, commercial confidentiality etc.
There are 23 reasons for exemption in total.
Responding time
Body in question must acknowledge request within 20 days.
They are allowed a further 40 days to deal with the information.
Tip
Keep questions simple and to the point.
Week 7's lecture was on copyright.
Copyright, Design & Patents Act 1988
Copyright laws are in place because they protect an individual's intellectual property.
You are infringing copyright law if you make beneficial use or exploit material that belongs to somebody else - without their permission.
Any initial ideas you bring to the floor aren't protected. Copyright laws only come into force when they start to be put into practice.
Why should we respect the laws?
- Without this protection, journalism may never have flourished.
- Maintains the material's exclusivity and therefore its value.
- Works both ways: you can't steal intellectual property anymore than anybody can steal yours.
- Ignoring the laws will cost you money and a whole lot of stress...and perhaps your career!
Copyright Law In Practise
Ian's Aston Martin VT, in which he used...
1. Archive footage of an Aston Martin factory
2. James Bond film clips
3. James Bond theme music
On the surface, all three potentially infringe copyright laws but none actually do. Here's why...
i. Number 1 already belonged to the BBC as part of their library.
ii. Numbers 2 and 3 were covered as the VT coincided with the release of a Bond movie. During the promotion of movies, news corporations have a window of three weeks when they can legally use clips/music from the new release. Luckily the sale of Aston Martin came within this window.
It would usually cost up to £2,000 to use this sort of film clip.
BUT we should be aware that material is often lifted, though only to a point.
Rivals regularly 'steal' stories from one another. This is known as 'fair dealing'.
Conditions
1. Must be attributed (i.e. - 'x' told News of the World...)
2. Must be in the public interest to a degree
3. Must be fair and mustn't go 'bigger' than the original story. For example, don't give any more detail than what the original publication did. You can only go bigger by doing your own unique follow-up.
You are also exempt from copyright law when you use material for purposes of comment and review. For example, it is fine to run clips in obits involving the individual that has recently passed.
BUT photos are never eligible for fair dealing.
This week's lecture was on Freedom of Information.
'Freedom of Information' was introduced by Tony Blair in the form of the Freedom of Information Act (2000), which came into effect in 2005.
"Unnecessary secrecy in government leads to arrogance in government and defective policy decisions"
- Tony Blair 1995
(Hmm, looks like FOI did little to stop this!)
Any publicly funded body must publish their internal documents on request. This means they must...
- Keep a schedule and backlog this information
- Give it to you at no cost (unless the task takes over four hours)
- Give it to you in 'reasonable' time
Exempt are issues surrounding national security and intelligence etc (common sense really!)
The man with the plan when it comes to FOI is Matthew Davies who visited our studio a while back.
This week's media law topic was privacy and confidentiality.
Section 8 of the Human Rights Act states that everybody has a right to privacy, including the right to enjoy private family life.
Civil Law
IN THE PAPERS THIS WEEK: Wayne Rooney on the front page of The Sun on holiday in Dubai. It is bigger news than it would have been because this has come just after questions over his loyalty to Manchester United.
So this is a clear breach of Section 8...
BUT...
1. The Sun would have got clearance to run these pictures from Rooney's agents.
2. It is likely money changed hands before permission was given.
Therefore, The Sun are in the clear, even though there needs to be consent from the subject of the picture in normal circumstances. The only time consent is not necessary is when the subject is on a clear public duty.
One of the most famous cases of picture rights is the HELLO! vs. OK! case
- Catherine Zeta Jones and Michael Douglas had given exclusive right to OK! for their wedding pictures, but not Hello! which also published them.
- In 2003, the judge said there was no law of privacy in which the celebs and OK! could recover damages from Hello!
- In 2005, the Court of Appeal decided the stars' confidence had been breached, so were allowed to sue Hello!
- But the decision that OK! could sue Hello was not overturned. See page 401 in McNae's.
If you breach any of the above, you can be sued, but if you breach the Official Secrets Act (1911), it could be a criminal offence.
Section 1 (see page 503) covers anything that could hinder a war effort or homeland security.
- For example, it is illegal to take pictures of army bases or power stations etc.
- You can be arrested on the spot under Section 33 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act.
Other sections cover what are known as 'silly secrets'.
Common Law
Everybody has a right to privacy (i.e. to keep secrets), so long as it is not in the public interest.
As a journalist, you have committed a crime and may have to pay compensation if you fail to uphold this right. This is known as BREACH OF CONFIDENCE.
A claimant has show all four of the following in court to prove you have breached their confidence:
1. The information has the necessary quality of confidence. This is serious information, which is not known (e.g. - your medical record). Things such as your birthplace and date of birth are regarded as 'tittle-tattle' so is not classed as breach of confidence.
2. The circumstances/place in which the information was imparted lends itself to private matters. For example, if you shout "I am gay" in the middle of town, your case will not get to court!
3. There was no permission to pass on the information.
4. Detriment to well-being has been caused as a result.
N.B. - the claimant has to prove every single one of these points to prove breach of confidence, where as in defamation, he/she only has to prove a tendency to one of the points.
Gagging clauses (in employment)
Although not part of a worker's contract of employment, they owe a common law 'duty of confidence' to their employer. This is so that any issues can be solved quietly and internally.
As a journalist, if you are interviewing anyone who is unhappy with their company (e.g. NHS?), it your duty to warn your subject that you are breaching this confidence if with what they are about to give you.
If they are still happy to carry on, fire away!
Blog about this week's lecture on privilege.
IN THE NEWS THIS WEEK: Pre-nuptual agreements, more legal standing from now on. Read more...
Anyway, privilege allows us to write material that is defamatory and could be untrue (i.e. protection/immunity from being sued).
Two types
1. Absolute privilege - records from parliament and usually in court
2. Qualified privilege - but needs to be fast, accurate, fair and without malice.
And has to be a member of public interest.
Two levels of QP
1. with or 'subject to' EXPLANATION or CONTRADICTION
2. without explanation or contradiction
You have privilege...
1. legislature*
2. court*
3. public inquiry*
4. public proceedings of an international organisation or conference*
* - anywhere in the world
The following areas contain a grey area of privilege. They are subject to explanation and contradiction.
1. public meetings
2. local council meetings
3. tribunals etc
4. UK companies
N.B. - Associations (FA/GMC etc) - findings/decisions covered, conference type bit NOT the actual proceedings!
Pressers
Public meetings, officially public from only 2000 because of the Human Rights Act and the Clegg Case. Read more...
Written handouts are now covered because of the Clegg Case.
BUT consider risks for live broadcasting...put in delay if necessary!
Summary
- Must be fair
- Accurate
- Without malice
- On a matter of public interest
Privilege immediately disappears once outside the proceedings.
Interestingly, if someone shouts from the gallery you can report it to add colour - as long as it is not defamatory.
BUT it's okay if they have been a witness.
Read my (slightly late!) post on defamation/libel
Catch-up blog on our lecture about defamation and libel.
REMEMBER: PUBLICATION + IDENTIFICATION + DEFAMATION = LIBEL
Introduction
- This area of law can be a very expensive business, although there has been a lack of recent high profile cases - perhaps due to the current economic climate.
- 1998: Kieran Fallon sued the Sporting Life newspaper for accusing him of deliberately not winning a race.
- To avoid getting sued, it is always important to remember balance. If you talk to both sides, you will pretty much have your legal defence.
DEFAMATION is a tendency to...
1. lower individual(s) in the estimation of right thinking people
2. cause them to be shunned/avoided
3. disparage them in their business, trade or profession
4. expose them to hatred, ridicule or contempt
- Notice the apparent vagueness of these conditions. In statute, what you print only needs to have a tendency to do any of the above.
- Think about the individual(s) reputation at the time of printing. How much do they have to lose? And would an upstanding member of a community think less of them as a result?
Defamation via pictures (juxtaposition libel)
- A big danger in television. Voiceovers - in OOVs for example - need to match the shots on-screen. If we are too careless, we could be defaming somebody without even knowing it.
- Be careful with imprecise shots. For example, if you are asked to go and get GVs of a terrorists house that has been raided and you include the door of a neighbour in the shot, you're in hot water.
- Therefore, people/companies must not be identified in the wrong context.
Reputation and meaning
- Reputation is precious, remembering this as a journalist is just as vital.
- Meaning: how what you print is interpreted by a 'right-thinking' person.
Inference and innuendo our hazards here
Former Cabinet Minister Lord Gowrie sued over an article that created the innuendo that he was taking drugs (see page 307 in McNae or read this)
Journalists' defences
1. JUSTIFICATION: "It's true and I can prove it"
2. FAIR COMMENT: "This is my honestly held opinion based on the facts"
3. ABSOLUTE PRIVILEGE: court reporting
4. QUALIFIED PRIVILEGE: police quote, council meetings etc
Reynold's defence
- In basic terms, a journalist can be let off if the defamatory remarks are seen to be in the public interest.
- If you come to your conclusions after practising 'responsible journalism' (i.e - kept notes, diaries, recordings), your defence will be enhanced.
EXAMPLE: The Sunday Times v Albert Reynolds
Former head of the Republic of Ireland Government Albert Reynolds sued the Sunday Times after a story that hinted at the fact he was misleading his country's parliament.
The Sunday Times argued that the report was necessary as it was clearly a matter of public interest. The newspaper lost, but a year or so later on appeal, it was officially ruled that the media have a duty to perform public duties of this ilk.
See page 357 for more or read this parliament document.
Bane and antidote
Accusation of libel removed by whole context (of the article or string of articles)
- BANE = the offence, ANTIDOTE = the defence - perhaps something said later on in the article that draws on a more balanced opinion about the subject)
Antidote can be in the form of an apology or clarification, which can usually be found tucked away in the bottom corner of page 20!
However, you have no defence when you...
- haven't checked facts
- haven't referred it up
- haven't put yourself in the shoes of the party in question
- get carried away by a spicy story
- don't bother to wait for your lawyer's opinion.
Summary
- Who am I writing about? Could they sue?
- Is it potentially defamatory?
- DO I have a defence? Which one?
Here are my notes on this week's lecture about court reporting.
The main point: Risk of PREJUDICE leads to CONTEMPT.
As journalists, we need to know when there is risk of printing certain details and when there isn't.
Here is a simple example...
EVENT 1: (10am) Man steals £4,000 from a post office. Press release to that effect sent out by police.
At this point, we can use the information given to us to print that story. We are at the (short-lived) safe point. No one has been arrested. For example, we would take audio from Mrs Ivy Jones (the victim/owner who was supervising the shop at the time).
EVENT 2: (4pm) Man arrested in connection with alleged offence.
Case is now legally active.
Story will be similar to the morning's, still beware of accidental identification at this point and keep checking with the police as to whether an arrest is about to be made. If your next bulletin is at 4.30pm and you think there is a good chance he may be arrested before then, air on the side of caution (e.g - don't include audio from victim etc).
EVENT 3: (5pm) Man charged.
The case will now go to Crown Court as it is an indictable offence, meaning a possible sentence of five years or more. For this reason, anything that may be used as evidence, such as the audio used earlier, has to be omitted and made untracable.
A case is legally active when:
1. Police make arrest
2. An arrest warrant has been issued
3. Magistrates issue summons
4. A person is charged
- Police normally have 24 hours to question a suspect
- It can be extended by 12 hours by a senior officer
- It can be extended a further 36 hours if magistrates agree
- It cannot exceed 96 hours
The limit for terror suspects is a lot longer. The controversial 28 days.
Cases are always sexed up and ridiculously unrealistic on TV and always happen at a Crown Court. On the other hand, Magistrates Courts are the place for minor crimes/disputes - basically the non-juicy stuff!
However, Magistrates still have significant powers, which are:
1. Six months jail sentence or £5,000 fine
2. Suspended sentence
3. Conditional discharge (e.g - don't offend within 12 months)
4. Community service orders (may be worth covering if the person plays for Winchester City or Southampton, depending on what publication you work for)
5. Binding over (e.g. - sum of £500)
6. ASBOs (Anti-Social Behaviour Orders)
IMPORTANT: Here are the only things you can say when reporting to avoid avoid prejudicing potential jurors.
- Name and age
- Address and occupation
- Charge(s)
- Date and place of Crown Court hearing
- Bail and legal aid conditions
- Names of counsel
REMEMBER: Any risk of PREJUDICE leads to CONTEMPT...Contempt of Court to be exact, which is a strict liability offence.
Key Stages of trial
1. Opening
2. Prosecution opening
3. Key prosecution witness
4. Defence opening
5. Key defence witnesses
6. Judge's summary
7. Jury sent out (deliberation/verdict)
8. Sentencing
This is where you need to convince your News Editor to give you time to cover the trial. You have to cover days when the defence speak as well as the prosecution, otherwise your reporting of the trial will appear unbalanced if you decide. Therefore, your News Editor has to decide whether it is high profile enough.
Qualified privilege (QP)
Journalists have legal protection when reporting the courts. It prevents them from being accused of contempt of court and getting an action for libel. This is known as qualified privilege (QP). However, this privilege is lost if your reporting is not fast (in the next available bulletin/edition), accurate (importance of shorthand) and fair (free from malice).
Links
BBC College of Journalism - The Reynolds Defence
Chris' notes from course site
