Media Freedom and Political Debate in the Digital Era

Date01 July 2006
Published date01 July 2006
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2006.00597.x
THE
MODERN LAW REVIEW
Volume 69 July 2006 No 4
Media Freedom and Political Debate in the Digital Era
Jacob Rowbottom
n
This article examines the impact of online expression on theories of media freedom.While media
freedom has generally been justi¢ed instrumentally, the opportunities for expression via the
Internet may require greater emphasis on the interests of the individual speaker. Despite this
development, this article shows how a small number of speakers will still command a much
wider audience and have greater in£uence over political debate. For such speakers the approach
to media freedom devised in the mass media erawil l remain applicable.
Since its inception, the new media has been predicted to revolutionise political
communications.
1
While it is still early days and the technology continues to
develop, many predictions have been partially realised. In the 2004 US elections,
the weblog (blog), which allows individuals to keep a logof their comments and
views online and to update them regularly, was the most talked about develop-
ment.The blogs producedby individualcitizens were seen to actas a watchdog on
both politicians and the established media.While this was the big story of 2004,
there is no reasonto assume the blog will be the dominant format in the future.
Alreadythere is talk of podcasting and videoblogging superseding the text-based
blog.The new technology is said to be breakingdown the barrierbetween citizen
and journalist. An indication of this processwas apparent in the wake of the July
2005 bombings in London. Pictures of the immediate aftermath and videos of
police raids taken with mobile phones helped to tell the story to the rest of the
world. Developments in technology are not restricted to individuals; the estab-
lished media are also adapting their services. The BBC, for example, already
makes a number of its television programmes available for viewing online and
many media providers are lookingfor ways toallow the audience toi nteract with
and comment upon their content. A number of established media entities are
buying up companies associated with new media, for example BSkyB has
acquired the broadband supplier Easynet;
2
ITV has bought Friends Reunited
n
King’s College, Cambridge.With thanks to Michael Birnhack, the participants of the Cambridge
University PublicLaw Discussion Group and the anonymous referees for comments on earlier drafts.
1 New media is used to describe a wide range of media based on information technology, such as
the Internet,WorldWideWeb,video games and insta nt messaging.The focus of this article will be
online expression, referring to communications on the Internet.
2TheTimes,17 October 2005.
rThe Modern LawReview Limited 2006
Published by BlackwellPublishing, 9600 Garsington Road,Oxford OX4 2DQ,UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
(2006) 69(4) MLR 489^513
and News Corp has bought the owners of myspace.com, Intermix.
3
Such moves
re£ect the established medias goal to increase their use of digital technologies to
distribute content.
These developments raise the question of whether online content should be
subject to the same regulations as other types of media or be relatively free of
any restraints. If a website features political advocacy in an election campaign,
should it carry the name and address of the publisher as is required for printed
posters supporti ng candidates?
4
Should some online content providers be subject
to right of reply laws or a duty to cover certai n types of content? A heavy-hande d
approach to regulation may discourage innovation by individual users, as seen in
the blogs and many individual websites. However, a hands-o¡ approach carries
the danger of undermining the public duties of the media and allowing political
debate to become skewed. Such issues are heightened if online technologies
become the dominant mode of political communication.
This article does not seek to answer these speci¢c questions, but will address
two preliminary issues. First, whether the normative approach to dealing with
media freedom should be modi¢ed in the light of thesechanges and place greater
emphasis on the individual speaker. The second issue is whether these changes
lead to a new paradigm in which regulations to promote the public service ele-
ment of media activity are inappropriate. In addressing these issues, this article
will consider arguments thatonl ine expression requiresa di¡erent approach from
that accorded to the traditional mas s media.The main grounds for a new approach
are premised upon the low cost of communications; the relative ease of participa-
tion; the greater emphasis on user control and consequent demise of mediators
and controlling elites. While accepting the many bene¢cial changes brought
about through online communications, this article will argue that rather than
generating a level playing ¢eld, online expression can not only perpetuate exist-
ing media elites, but also create new ones. Consequently, online expression oper-
ates at di¡erent tiers, as found in the o¥ine world. The regulatory approach may
therefore require di¡erent methods depending on the tierof expression.
In making this argument, the articlewill be divided into ¢ve sections.The ¢rst
will look at the traditional approaches to regulating the mass media and the rela-
tionship between expression rights and media freedom.The second section will
examine some of the academic responses to the Internet and its impact on the
media and freedom of expression. The third section will consider the i ncreased
opportunitie s for individual par ticipation on the Internet, which di¡erentiate it
from traditional forms of mass media. The fourth section will then show how
certain mediaorganisations/speakers maintain an elite status online that gives dis-
proportionate in£uence over public debate. Finally, possible strategies of regula-
tion and the various pitfalls will be outlined. While this raises a range of
important issues for di¡erent categories of expression, the central focus of this
article will be the coverage of politics and political debate, an issue that lies at the
heart of the democratic and public service functions of the media.
3The DailyTelegraph,7 December 2005.
4 See the discussion inThe Electoral Commission, Online ElectionCampaigns:Report and Recommen-
dations[2003] at paras [4.10^4.16].
Media Freedom and Political Debate
490 rThe Modern Law ReviewLimited 2006
(2006) 69(4)MLR 489^513

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT