1.
Barendt, E. M. & et al. Media law: text, cases and materials. vol. Longman law series (Pearson, 2014).
2.
Hitchens, L. Broadcasting pluralism and diversity: a comparative study of policy and regulation. (Hart Publishing, 2006).
3.
Lee C. Bollinger, Jr. Freedom of the Press and Public Access: Toward a Theory of Partial Regulation of the Mass Media. Michigan Law Review 75, 1–42.
4.
US Supreme Court. Reno v ACLU (1997) 521 US 844. (1997).
5.
High Court of Australia. Dow Jones & Co Inc v Gutnick 1 LRC 368. (2002).
6.
Jacob Rowbottom. Media Freedom and Political Debate in the Digital Era. The Modern Law Review 69, 489–513.
7.
Barendt, E. M. & et al. Media law: text, cases and materials. vol. Longman law series (Pearson, 2014).
8.
Stewart, P. Or of the press. Hastings Law Journal 26, 631–637.
9.
Barendt, E. M. Freedom of speech. (Oxford University Press, 2007).
10.
Thomas Gibbons. Freedom of the press: ownership and editorial values. Public Law 279–299 (1992).
11.
House of Lords Communications Committee. The Ownership of the News - First Report of 2007-8, HL 122. (2008).
12.
European Convention on Human Rights & fundamental freedoms. (1950).
13.
Observer and Guardian v United Kingdom (Application 13585/88) 14 EHRR 153. Observer and Guardian v UK (Court: European Court of Human Rights, 1991).
14.
McGregor, O. R. & Great Britain. Royal Commission on the Press - Final Report. vol. Cmnd 6810 (H.M.S.O., 1977).
15.
Lichtenberg, J. Democracy and the mass media: a collection of essays. vol. Cambridge studies in philosophy and public policy (Cambridge University Press, 1990).
16.
Anderson, D. A. Freedom of the Press. Texas Law Review 80, 429–530 (2002).
17.
Association Ekin v France (Application No 39288/98) 35 EHRR 1207. Court: European Court of Human Rights (2002).
18.
Barendt, E. M. & et al. Media law: text, cases and materials. vol. Longman law series (Pearson, 2014).
19.
Robertson, G. & Nicol, A. G. L. Media law. (Penguin, 2008).
20.
Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court). R on the application of Anna Ford v PCC EMLR 95 [2002] EMLR 5. (2002).
21.
Leveson, L. J. The Leveson Report, Executive Summary HC 779. (2012).
22.
Barendt, E. Statutory Underpinning: A Threat to Press Freedom Media Law after Leveson. Journal of Media Law 5, (2013).
23.
Leveson, L. J. The Leveson Report, Executive Summary. (2012).
24.
Leveson Report: Cross Party Royal Charter. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/leveson-report-cross-party-royal-charter (2013).
25.
The Independent Press Standards Organization (IPSO). https://www.ipso.co.uk/IPSO/whoweare.html.
26.
IPSO Editors’ Code of Practice. https://www.ipso.co.uk/IPSO/cop.html.
27.
Press Complaints Commission Editors’ Code of Practice. http://www.pcc.org.uk/cop/practice.html.
28.
Leveson, L. J. The Leveson Report. (2012).
29.
Leveson, L. J. The Leveson Report. (2012).
30.
Leveson Report: Cross Party Royal Charter. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/leveson-report-cross-party-royal-charter (2013).
31.
Barendt, E. M. & et al. Media law: text, cases and materials. vol. Longman law series (Pearson, 2014).
32.
Robertson, G. & Nicol, A. G. L. Media law. (Penguin, 2008).
33.
British Board of Film Classification guidelines. http://www.bbfc.co.uk/.
34.
British Board of Film Classification. BBFC policy statement, sexual and sadistic violence.
35.
UK Government. Video Recordings Act 1984. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/39/contents (1984).
36.
European Court of Human Rights. Wingrove v UK (17419/90), 24 EHRR 1. (1997).
37.
Williams, B. Report of the Committee on obscenity and film censorship. vol. Cmnd 7772 (H.M.S.O., 1979).
38.
British Board of Film Classification. Report on effects of sexual and sadistic violence in films.
39.
European Court of Human Rights. Otto-Preminger Institute v Austria (A/295-A), 19 EHRR 34. (1994).
40.
R v Video Appeals Committee of the BBFC, ex parte the BBFC, EMLR 850. (2000).
41.
Barendt, E. M. & et al. Media law: text, cases and materials. vol. Longman law series (Pearson, 2014).
42.
A public service for all: the BBC in the digital age (Cm 6763, 2006). (2006).
43.
House of Lords Select Committee on BBC Charter Review. The Review of the BBC’s Royal Charter (2005, HL Paper 50-1). http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldbbc/50/5002.htm (2005).
44.
Dept of National Heritage & British Broadcasting Corporation. Broadcasting: copy of Royal Charter for the continuance of the British Broadcasting Corporation. vol. Cm 6925 (HMSO, 1996).
45.
Dept for Culture, Media and Sport. Broadcasting: an agreement between Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and the BBC. vol. Cm 6872 (TSO, 2006).
46.
Communications Act 2003. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/contents (2003).
47.
BBC. BBC Annual Report 2012/13 - Overview. http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/news/press_releases/2013/annual_report.html (2013).
48.
Born, G. & Prosser, T. Culture and Consumerism: Citizenship, Public Service Broadcasting and the BBC’s Fair Trading Obligations. The Modern Law Review 64, 657–687.
49.
Vick, D. W. Regulatory convergence? Legal Studies 26, 26–64.
50.
Queen’s Bench Division. R v BBC, ex parte Referendum Party, EMLR 605. (1997).
51.
Dept of Culture, Media and Sport. Details of Culture, Media and Sport select committee inquiry - The Future of the BBC. http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/culture-media-and-sport-committee/news/131022-future-of-the-bbc-tor/.
52.
Culture, Media & Sport Committee. BBC Licence Fee Settlement and Annual Report - Fourth Report. (2011).
53.
Barendt, E. M. & et al. Media law: text, cases and materials. vol. Longman law series (Pearson, 2014).
54.
Robertson, G. & Nicol, A. G. L. Media law. (Penguin, 2008).
55.
Communications Act 2003. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/contents (2003).
56.
OFCOM. OFCOM Broadcasting Code. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/.
57.
OFCOM. OFCOM dismissal of complaints against Jerry Springer - the Opera. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/enforcement/broadcast-bulletins/pcb61/ (9AD).
58.
House of Lords. R (On the Application of Pro-Life Alliance) v BBC, 1 AC 185 (Hoffmann, Scott). (2004).
59.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Gaunt v OFCOM, EWCA Civ 692, 1 WLR 2355. (2011).
60.
Hitchens, L. Broadcasting pluralism and diversity: a comparative study of policy and regulation. (Hart Publishing, 2006).
61.
OFCOM. OFCOM Broadcasting Code. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/.
62.
BBC Trust. From Seesaw to Wagon Wheel: safeguarding impartiality in the 21st century. (2007).
63.
UK Government. Broadcasting Act 1990. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/42/contents (1990).
64.
Hare, I. Insulting Politicians on the Radio? Journal of Media Law 4, 29–34.
65.
House of Lords Communications Committee. Media Convergence - Second Report. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldselect/ldcomuni/154/15402.htm (2013).
66.
Fielden, L. Regulating for trust in journalism: standards regulation in the age of blended media. (Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, 2011).
67.
Barendt, E. M. & et al. Media law: text, cases and materials. vol. Longman law series (Pearson, 2014).
68.
Queen’s Bench Division. R v ASA, ex parte Charles Robertson, EMLR 463. (2000).
69.
Committee of Advertising Practice. UK Code of Non-Broadcasting Advertising, Sales Promotion and Direct Marketing. http://www.cap.org.uk/Advertising-Codes/Non-Broadcast.aspx.
70.
OFCOM. Code on the Scheduling of Television Advertising. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/advert-code/.
71.
Barendt, E. M. & et al. Media law: text, cases and materials. vol. Longman law series (Pearson, 2014).
72.
VGT Verein gegen Tierfabriken v Switzerland, 34 EHRR 4. VGT Verein gegen Tierfabriken v Switzerland (2002).
73.
R (On the Application of ADI) v Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, 1 AC 1312. Official Transcript (2008).
74.
European Court of Human Rights. Animal Defenders International v UK, European Court decision of 22 April 2013. http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/fra/pages/search.aspx?i=001-119244 (22AD).
75.
Robertson, G. & Nicol, A. G. L. Media law. (Penguin, 2008).
76.
Hitchens, L. Broadcasting pluralism and diversity: a comparative study of policy and regulation. (Hart Publishing, 2006).
77.
Chancery Division. DGFT v Tobyward, 2 All ER 266 - [1989] 1 W.L.R. 517. (1989).
78.
Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court). R v ASA, ex parte Matthias Rath, EMLR 581. (2001).
79.
Colin R. Munro. Self-regulation in the media. Public Law 6–17.
80.
Committee of Advertising Practice. BCAP Television Advertising Code. http://www.cap.org.uk/Advertising-Codes/Broadcast.aspx.
81.
European Court of Human Rights. TV Vest and Pensioners Party v Norway, 48 EHRR 51. (2009).
82.
Andrew Scott. ‘A Monstrous and Unjustifiable Infringement’?: Political Expression and the Broadcasting Ban on Advocacy Advertising. The Modern Law Review 66, 224–244.
83.
Rowbottom, J. Animal Defenders International: Speech, Spending, and a Change of Direction in Strasbourg. Journal of Media Law 5, 1–13.
84.
Barendt, E. M. & et al. Media law: text, cases and materials. vol. Longman law series (Pearson, 2014).
85.
Communications Act 2003. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/contents (2003).
86.
House of Lords Communications Committee. The Ownership of News. vol. HL 122 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldcomuni/122/12202.htm (2008).
87.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). BSkyB v Competition Commission, EWCA Civ 2. (2010).
88.
Smith, R. C. & Tambini, D. Measuring Media Plurality in the United Kingdom: Policy Choices and Regulatory Challenges. Journal of Media Law 4, 35–63.
89.
House of Lords Communications Committee. Media Plurality. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldselect/ldcomm/120/12002.htm (2014).
90.
Hitchens, L. Broadcasting pluralism and diversity: a comparative study of policy and regulation. (Hart Publishing, 2006).
91.
Rowbottom, J. Democracy distorted: wealth, influence and democratic politics. vol. The law in context series (Cambridge University Press, 2010).
92.
Craufurd Smith, R. Reviewing Media Ownership Rules in the UK and Europe: Competing or Complementary Investigations? Journal of Media Law 5, 332–344.
93.
Arnott, C. Media Mergers and the Meaning of Sufficient Plurality: A Tale of Two Acts. Journal of Media Law 2, 245–275.
94.
Dept for Culture, Media & Sport. OFCOM Report and other documents on News Corporation acquisition of BSkyB. http://www.culture.gov.uk/publications/7737.aspx (2011).
95.
Dept for Culture, Media & Sport. Media ownership and plurality. https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/media-ownership-and-plurality (2013).
96.
Barendt, E. M. & et al. Media law: text, cases and materials. vol. Longman law series (Pearson, 2014).
97.
Barendt, E. M. Freedom of speech. (Oxford University Press, 2007).
98.
Murray, A. Information technology law: the law and society. (Oxford University Press, 2010).
99.
US Supreme Court. Reno v ACLU (1997) 521 US 844. (1997).
100.
Divisional Court. Chambers v DPP, EWHC 2157 (QB). (2012).
101.
Communications Act 2003. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/contents (2003).
102.
Jacob Rowbottom. Media Freedom and Political Debate in the Digital Era. The Modern Law Review 69, 489–513.
103.
Internet Watch Foundation. http://www.iwf.org.uk/services/blocking.
104.
House of Lords Communications Committee. Media Convergence - Second Report. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldselect/ldcomuni/154/15402.htm (2013).
105.
Hitchens, L. Broadcasting pluralism and diversity: a comparative study of policy and regulation. (Hart Publishing, 2006).
106.
Price, M. E. The Newness of New Technology. Cardozo Law Review 22, 1885–1913.
107.
Edwards, L. & Waelde, C. Law and the Internet. (Hart, 2009).
108.
Jack L. Goldsmith. Against Cyberanarchy. The University of Chicago Law Review 65, 1199–1250.
109.
The Authority for Television on Demand. Authority for Television on Demand (ATVOD) Rules. http://www.atvod.co.uk/rules-and-guidance.
110.
Barendt, E. M. & et al. Media law: text, cases and materials. vol. Longman law series (Pearson, 2014).
111.
Barendt, E. M. Freedom of speech. (Oxford University Press, 2007).
112.
High Court of Australia. Dow Jones & Co Inc v Gutnick 1 LRC 368. (2002).
113.
Queen’s Bench Division. Bunt v Tilley, 3 All ER 336. (2006).
114.
Queen’s Bench Division. Metropolitan International Schools v Designtechnica EWHC 1765 (QB), EMLR 27. (2009).
115.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Tamiz v Google Inc, EWCA Civ 308, EMLR 14. (2013).
116.
Defamation Act 2013. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/contents/enacted (2013).
117.
R v Perrin, EWCA Crim 747, All ER (D) 359 (Mar). Court: Court of Appeal (2002).
118.
R v Bowden, 2 All ER 418. (2000).
119.
Birnhack, M. D. & Rowbottom, J. H. Shielding Children: The European Way Symposium: Do Children Have the Same First Amendment Rights as Adults. Chicago-Kent Law Review 79, 175–227 (2004).
120.
BBC News. Google and Microsoft agree steps to block abuse images. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24980765 (18AD).
121.
Muir Watt, H. Yahoo Cyber-Collision of Cultures: Who Regulates (Special Feature - Cyberage Conflicts Law). Michigan Journal Of International Law 24, 673–696.
122.
Godfrey v Demon Internet Ltd, QB 201. (2001).
123.
Divisional Court. Atkins, Goodland v DPP, 2 All ER 425. (2000).
124.
R v Porter, EWCA Crim 560, 2 All ER 625. Court: Court of Appeal (2006).