1.
Barendt, E.M., et al: Media law: text, cases and materials. Pearson, Harlow (2014).
2.
Hitchens, L.: Broadcasting pluralism and diversity: a comparative study of policy and regulation. Hart Publishing, Oxford (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. Pearson, Harlow (2014).
8.
Stewart, P.: Or of the press. Hastings Law Journal. 26, 631–637.
9.
Barendt, E.M.: Freedom of speech. Oxford University Press, Oxford (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, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldcomuni/ldcomuni.htm, (2008).
12.
European Convention on Human Rights & fundamental freedoms, http://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=basictexts&c=#n1359128122487_pointer, (1950).
13.
Observer and Guardian v United Kingdom (Application 13585/88) 14 EHRR 153. Court: European Court of Human Rights (1991).
14.
McGregor, O.R., Great Britain: Royal Commission on the Press - Final Report. H.M.S.O., London (1977).
15.
Lichtenberg, J.: Democracy and the mass media: a collection of essays. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (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. (2002).
18.
Barendt, E.M., et al: Media law: text, cases and materials. Pearson, Harlow (2014).
19.
Robertson, G., Nicol, A.G.L.: Media law. Penguin, London (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, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122145147/http:/www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/about/the-report/, (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, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122145147/http:/www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/about/the-report/, (2012).
24.
Leveson Report: Cross Party Royal Charter, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/leveson-report-cross-party-royal-charter.
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, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122145147/http:/www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/about/the-report/, (2012).
29.
Leveson, L.J.: The Leveson Report, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140122145147/http:/www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/about/the-report/, (2012).
30.
Leveson Report: Cross Party Royal Charter, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/leveson-report-cross-party-royal-charter.
31.
Barendt, E.M., et al: Media law: text, cases and materials. Pearson, Harlow (2014).
32.
Robertson, G., Nicol, A.G.L.: Media law. Penguin, London (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, http://www.bbfc.co.uk/what-classification/research.
35.
UK Government: Video Recordings Act 1984, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/39/contents.
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. H.M.S.O., London (1979).
38.
British Board of Film Classification: Report on effects of sexual and sadistic violence in films, http://www.bbfc.co.uk/what-classification/research.
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. Pearson, Harlow (2014).
42.
A public service for all: the BBC in the digital age (Cm 6763, 2006), https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-public-service-for-all-the-bbc-in-the-digital-age, (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.
44.
Dept of National Heritage, British Broadcasting Corporation: Broadcasting: copy of Royal Charter for the continuance of the British Broadcasting Corporation. HMSO, London (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. TSO, London (2006).
46.
Communications Act 2003, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/contents.
47.
BBC: BBC Annual Report 2012/13 - Overview, http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/news/press_releases/2013/annual_report.html.
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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-121X.2006.00005.x.
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, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmcumeds/454/45402.htm, (2011).
53.
Barendt, E.M., et al: Media law: text, cases and materials. Pearson, Harlow (2014).
54.
Robertson, G., Nicol, A.G.L.: Media law. Penguin, London (2008).
55.
Communications Act 2003, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/contents.
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/.
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, Oxford (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, http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/our_work/editorial_standards/impartiality/safeguarding_impartiality.html, (2007).
63.
UK Government: Broadcasting Act 1990, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/42/contents.
64.
Hare, I.: Insulting Politicians on the Radio? Journal of Media Law. 4, 29–34. https://doi.org/10.5235/175776312802483899.
65.
House of Lords Communications Committee: Media Convergence - Second Report, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldselect/ldcomuni/154/15402.htm.
66.
Fielden, L.: Regulating for trust in journalism: standards regulation in the age of blended media. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Oxford (2011).
67.
Barendt, E.M., et al: Media law: text, cases and materials. Pearson, Harlow (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. Pearson, Harlow (2014).
72.
VGT Verein gegen Tierfabriken v Switzerland, 34 EHRR 4. (2002).
73.
R (On the Application of ADI) v Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, 1 AC 1312. (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.
75.
Robertson, G., Nicol, A.G.L.: Media law. Penguin, London (2008).
76.
Hitchens, L.: Broadcasting pluralism and diversity: a comparative study of policy and regulation. Hart Publishing, Oxford (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. https://doi.org/10.5235/17577632.5.1.1.
84.
Barendt, E.M., et al: Media law: text, cases and materials. Pearson, Harlow (2014).
85.
Communications Act 2003, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/contents.
86.
House of Lords Communications Committee: The Ownership of News, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldcomuni/122/12202.htm.
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. https://doi.org/10.5235/175776312802483862.
89.
House of Lords Communications Committee: Media Plurality, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldselect/ldcomm/120/12002.htm.
90.
Hitchens, L.: Broadcasting pluralism and diversity: a comparative study of policy and regulation. Hart Publishing, Oxford (2006).
91.
Rowbottom, J.: Democracy distorted: wealth, influence and democratic politics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (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. https://doi.org/10.5235/17577632.5.2.332.
93.
Arnott, C.: Media Mergers and the Meaning of Sufficient Plurality: A Tale of Two Acts. Journal of Media Law. 2, 245–275. https://doi.org/10.5235/175776310794389373.
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.
95.
Dept for Culture, Media & Sport: Media ownership and plurality, https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/media-ownership-and-plurality.
96.
Barendt, E.M., et al: Media law: text, cases and materials. Pearson, Harlow (2014).
97.
Barendt, E.M.: Freedom of speech. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007).
98.
Murray, A.: Information technology law: the law and society. Oxford University Press, Oxford (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.
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.
105.
Hitchens, L.: Broadcasting pluralism and diversity: a comparative study of policy and regulation. Hart Publishing, Oxford (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, Oxford (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. Pearson, Harlow (2014).
111.
Barendt, E.M.: Freedom of speech. Oxford University Press, Oxford (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.
117.
R v Perrin, EWCA Crim 747, All ER (D) 359 (Mar). (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.
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. (2006).