Tag Archives: crime and courts bill

Stephen Tall

Small-scale blogs to be excluded from post-Leveson media regulation

By Stephen Tall | Sat 20th April 2013 - 5:15 pm

A week ago I posed (and answered) the question, After Leveson: which blogs are to be regulated? Answer: no-one yet knows. Well, we do now know.

The Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) yesterday announced a ‘refinement’ of the Leveson legislation included within the Crime and Courts Bill. And it confirms that small-blogs are no longer to be expected to join the proposed self-regulator (though they can do if they wish):

The amendments, which have cross-party agreement, make clear that small blogs will not be classed as ‘relevant publishers’, and be considered by the House of Commons on

…

Continue reading »
Posted in News | Also tagged , , , , and | 13 Comments
Prateek Buch

Clarifying the press regulator’s relationship with the web

By Prateek Buch | Wed 20th March 2013 - 3:30 pm

To post or not to post?A furore has broken out over whether the Royal Charter on press regulation, and the amendments to the Crime and Courts Bill that accompany it, would mean that bloggers and tweeters would be subject to ‘exemplary damages’ in the event of successful complaints brought against them.

The Guardian’s live blogger Andrew Sparrow initially thought that blogs and Twitter might be subject to regulation by the newly created press regulator – the independent body recommended by Lord Justice Leveson. He was swiftly corrected, and the correction sheds light on the source of confusion – the definition of “relevant publisher” in both the Royal Charter and amendments to the Crime and Courts Bill.

Continue reading »
Posted in News | Also tagged | 14 Comments
Advert



Recent Comments

  • Peter Martin
    @ Michael BG, "The party’s policy is to set the Guaranteed Basic Income at 50% of the median income for household types excluding housing costs." ...
  • Michael BG
    Paul Hindley, I am pleased to read that your head won over your heart and you voted for the Guaranteed Basic Income option. I hope that ending deep povert...
  • Andrew Melmoth
    @Martin Gray I've honestly no idea what point you are trying to make. I suspect you are assuming I hold views that I don't....
  • Kara Meddings
    *Maybe the time has come to not have any minimum quota based on sex, gender identity or any other protected characteristic and just elect people based on what t...
  • Tristan Ward
    @ Mick Taylor "John Stuart Mill’s no harm principle is the one to follow, namely that we can agree that everyone can express an opinion or behave in any wa...