Recent Tweets on @LSEMediaPaL

    Link to LSEMediaPaL on twitter

    I also used to be mediapal on del.ici.ous

    Tuesday, 30 March 2010

    Papers published on paparazzi harassment and libel reform

    I've had a couple of research papers published in the last months that may be of interest to some. If that's the case, please let me know and I'll be happy to forward...

    Scott (2009) Flash Flood or Slow Burn? Celebrities, Photographers and the Protection from Harassment Act. Media & Arts Law Review, 14(4), 397-424


    • Abstract: In recent months, a number of female celebrities have been awarded court orders under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 to constrain the excessive behaviour of the paparazzi. This is a novel, but unsurprising, use of the statute. Indeed, what has been most startling in this development is the fact that the statutory cause of action has never formerly been deployed in this way in the United Kingdom. The aim of this paper is to assess why this has been the case. In doing so, it reflects upon opposing perspectives on the interaction between celebrities and the media; details the origins of the 1997 Act, its requirements, and their application to the newsgathering context; reviews the jurisprudential forebears to the recent actions that suggested that the Act could be deployed in a newsgathering context come the appropriate case, and considers the operation, strengths, and putative weaknesses of alternative regulatory options (in particular, that offered in this respect by the Press Complaints Commission). The paper concludes by highlighting a combination of factors that may explain why the Act has been used only now, by musing on the ramifications for celebrities and the paparazzi, and by reflecting on the likely future interplay between the legal and regulatory avenues oriented towards combating the problem of harassment by photographers and other journalists.

    Mullis and Scott (2010) Something rotten in the state of English libel law? A rejoinder to the clamour for reform of defamation'. Communications Law , 14(6), 173-183

    • I've commented on this paper on MediaPaL previously. It has since had a fair, if often critical, run in the broader media and policy circles.

    No comments:

    There was an error in this gadget