Media Law: Privacy and Confidentiality

As with most aspects of media law, privacy and confidentiality laws are derived from wide-ranging acts and laws. Specifically from Section Eight of the Human Rights Act. This specific section affords any individual the right to a private life.

The only way around privacy laws is with consent, of which there are two types: Explicit and Implicit. Explicit consent comes in the form of a consent form or some type of document that states in black and white that (for example) a photographer can take a picture. Implied consent is a on slightly shakier legal ground but still holds sway. If for example, the European Cup Final is held at Wembley and Prince William is the official who hands over the trophy to the winning team then consent is implicit. The Prince knows that he is at a public event and that there are thousands in the stadium and millions of other people watching world-wide so therefore he cannot claim an invasion of privacy.

Confidentiality is the other face of this double-headed legal coin and is there to protect two specific types of secret. The bigger of the two fish in the frying pan is the protection of state secrets. Under the Official Secrets Act 1911, it is considered an act of treason to give away state secrets to an enemy (Spooks is also educational as well as thoroughly entertaining!). The other side of confidentiality relates to Common Law secrets. This ranges from business or trade/commercial secrets right down to family secrets.

Often in the commercial world, employers put gagging clauses in employees' contracts in order to legally prevent them from giving away secrets or "whistleblowing". Whistleblowers were in fact the reason behind many employers gagging employees. One of the most famous cases is the Graham Pink case. His 'whistleblowing' alerted people to the poor state of an NHS hospital. From a journalists' point of view, whistleblowers are vital in helping to fulfill the role of the 'fourth estate' and many helplines and websites have been set up to help whistleblowers confidentially tell journalists of problems particularly in public organisations like the NHS.

Finally, confidence is breached if: it carries the necessary quality of confidence. An official state secret carries a higher quality of confidence compared to letting people know that your girlfriend is a closet Star Trek fan for example. However, under the right circumstances something as ridiculous as your girlfriend being a closet Star Trek fan could amount to breach of confidence IF she has not given you permission to broach the subject and if it has caused ACTUAL detriment. If she returns to work and is shunned and avoided she can claim that confidence has been breached. Unlike libel laws where an individual can prove that information COULD cause detriment, confidence is only breached when it has actually caused damage to a person's reputation.

Media Law: Copyright

Ever since the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988, intellectual property has been protected from being used without permission. Over twenty years on, there is little material in the public domain that is not protected somehow by copyright.

Everything from books to films and from music to photographs that is original work has a copyright logo slapped on it somewhere. From a journalist's point of view, copyright gives them their license to write without danger of a story being stolen. On the other hand, it means that in order to do certain types of stories, copyright royalties can prove to be a right royal pain in the backside. Any music or footage owned and copyrighted by someone else must be legally bought and paid for, leaving the rightful owners with cartoon-like pound signs over their eyes as they imagine the money rolling in.

The value of a product rises due to its exclusivity. For example, the shots of Jonny Wilkinson's winning drop-goal against Australia in the 2003 Rugby World Cup Final is worth an awful lot of money purely because ITV had the exclusive rights to the tournament therefore affording them exclusive rights to footage of one of the most iconic images in English sport in the early part of the 21st Century.

Sports coverage is in fact one of the main danger areas of copyright, along with material from the internet and sites like YouTube. This is simply a nightmare for journalists: although classed as 'in the public domain' there are still strict copyright laws surrounding these areas making them a legal minefield. Photographs and film archive are also dangerous for journalists.

Despite the doom and gloom surrounding copyright, the issue of 'Fair Dealing' allows journalists to effectively 'lift' material from their rivals. This is only classed as fair dealing if a)the story is in the public interest, b)it is attributed and c)most importantly, it is 'fair'. As long as the main thrust of the story and quotes are accurate then a journalist can get away with fair dealing.

Crucially, this allows the wider reporting of news. Finally, it is acceptable to use footage/audio for criticism or review purposes providing someone talks over the top of it and if a famous celebrity dies, then it is also acceptable to use well-known clips from their career.

Award-Winning WINOL Still Lacking Journalistic Flair

Four weeks into the production of WINOL and it's about time I blogged on my thoughts on proceedings thus far.

All things considered the programme is now looking a lot more like a professional, well-rounded news and sport production. My role on the production team (and part-time presenter) has been a valuable experience and I have encountered many 'toils and snares' to quote a famous song lyric, all of which have furthered my education as a journalist.

The first week was always going to be riddled with cliches concerning rustiness and general lack of practise. To the team's credit, already by week two we were producing a bulletin that mirrored the standard that the third years reached at the end of last year. Similar standards were reached in weeks three and four, an effort praised by visiting guest editors from well-knows news corporations.

There are, however, a few minor issues to solve. Editorally, there appear to be few hard-hitting news stories with strong angles and pictures. Admittedly, Winchester is quite a sleepy town news-wise with only the odd parking issue rearing its ugly head now and again. On a positive note, it's good to see reporters working sequences into their packages and starting to eliminate the jarring GVs that smack of rushed filming and a general lack of pictures.

The sport team will always have the advantage of forward planning and has now reached the point where it can be creative and produce more entertaining news packages. It is easy for them to slip into a state of dependency on highlights rather than belt-and-braces news stories concerning sport. It would be nice to see a real sports news story rather than a procession of highlight reels.

The structure of WINOL is now easing the workload on the various departments. Consequently, the website now looks far more professional and eye-catching. The fact that content is pouring into the system is fantastic and, coupled with the drive to include more visual content (pictures and video), the website is now like a living, breathing organism compared to the asthmatic, forgotten runt of the litter it appeared to resemble a year ago. As a member of the production team, it's great to be able to come up with clever, pun-laden headlines when subbing a story.

Let's hope that by Christmas we can pull our socks up even further still and challenge for some serious student media awards. In my opinion, they can start engraving the trophy now. Here is the latest bulletin exclusively for your viewing pleasure.

Cameron Reveals Velvet Glove To Cover Iron Fist

Prime Minister David Cameron's announcement of the government's promise to push economic growth appears to have kicked the "spending cuts" political football into touch. With taxpayers set to bear the brunt of the Chancellor's axe, the promotion of something positive appears on the face of it, to be a handy distraction from the doom and gloom in the wake of last Wednesday's PMQs.

Mr Cameron's speech to the CBI promised an increase in funding for new businesses to work in tandem with the cuts, in a bid to balance the books in five years time. Has no-one else spotted the gaping hole in the Prime Minister's plan? Where is all this money going to come from?

The liquidation of several QUANGOS combined with the cutting of nearly half a million public sector jobs will free up a certain amount of money but to announce a brand new business initiative along with a proposed £30bn transport project smacks of a want to create a lasting legacy.

The plan to cut public sector jobs and recreate them in the private sector is surely going to have a detrimental effect on economics. It could potentially start another vicious circle of borrowing that plunged this country into its current economic woe.

On the other hand, the Prime Minister's transport plan is something that has been a long time in coming. Rising train fares and the drive to get more people using public transport (among other things) is something that desperately needs addressing. However, Mr Cameron was keen to stress that timing was vital in ensuring economic stability and perhaps his timing in announcing a multi-million pound investment in transport needs to come after the proverbial green shoots of recovery have begun to bloom.

I may be wrong. Hitler dragged Nazi Germany out of economic strife by creating jobs that updated and modernised infrastructure. Here's hoping the comparisons with the current UK administration end there...

(Picture: www.bbc.co.uk)

Borough Council Yet To Feel The Pinch

Nationally, the Coalition Government is announcing cut-backs in nearly every sector including their self-styled 'Bonfire of Quangos'. Yet, looking at the manifestos for my local government by-elections, it seems as if the tight purse-strings haven't quite reached the West Country yet.

While Mr Cameron's minions announce yet more funding cuts and job losses, it seems that party policy of all three heavyweights in Swindon is intent on investment rather than cutting back. The Conservative-led council has developed a reputation for doubling back on election promises (perhaps we should have seen this coming with child benefits). Over the last 18 months or so, promises to make the town a leading ambassador of the new green economy and plans to introduce a free wi-fi internet connection for all to name but two, have slowly slipped under the radar.

What will change under a new council? Everything, according to Labour and the Liberals but in reality, they will slide into obscurity and decide to blow the whole budget installing state-of-the-art traffic lights on a roundabout or something equally as pointless.

On a national scale, oh how these Liberal types have made me laugh over the last few days. Students in particular, the great champions of the liberal cause during the election, have angrily renounced their support for Mr Clegg and co after they appear to be sat twiddling their thumbs in the corner following Lord Browne's recommendation to increase student tuition fees. Well they did promise change didn't they? Just not quite what we were expecting...

(Picture: www.swindonclimate.org.uk)

Who Needs The National Lottery When You've Got Libel Laws

Defamation and subsequent libel cases are a constant pain for journalists. From my own experiences writing stories or scripts, I have realised how vital it is for a journalist to have their legal head screwed on at all times.

It was shocking to see an article in Monday's Guardian, revealing a 10-year high for libel cases in the UK. According to a leading law company, the 'weaker' defamation laws set the bar so low that defamation writs to the high court have increased by 15% in the past year alone and over the past 3 years, have nearly doubled.


These are frightening statistics and highlight precisely how easy it is to manipulate the libel laws in the UK. Is this however, just a sign of the world that we live in? Jason Lewis, a partner of the law firm Reynolds Porter Chamberlain says that libel action has increased because of the digital age and the huge data resource of the internet. Defamatory material can now be read or watched all over the world.

The Coalition Government announced in July that it will oversee a major overhaul of the libel laws in this country. The libel culture has become such an easy way to make money let's hope the powers that be don't renege on another of their promises...

(Article from The Guardian -http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jul/09/libel-law-review)

Time To Hand Football Back To The Fans

This week a potential landmark court case will be heard over the issue of sports broadcasting rights. The issue surrounds a Portsmouth landlady who, in a bid to tackle rising costs, removed Sky Sports from her pub and replaced it with a European-based viewing card. As this is in breach of broadcasting rights, she has taken her 'freedom of trade' argument all the way to the European Court of Justice in a bid to secure fairer rights for all.

Sky paid £1.8 billion for exclusive broadcasting rights to the Premier League and it's understandable that these costs are now being passed onto the consumer. In a typical large-ish pub, the owner would expect up to 200+ customers on the afternoon of a big game. Compared to a typical household of 4 people then there is a significant increase in viewers from one source.

Sky's massive investment since the start of the Premier League in 1992 has pushed English football into a different era. For a long time they have monopolised the English market whereas their foreign counterparts don't. European broadcasters have no issues with their cards being used outside of a certain territory and this creates problems for Sky in particular.

However, it is about time someone stood up for the football fan in this country. Fans of other top flight teams around Europe can watch their team either on terrestrial or accessible satellite television but if they choose to attend games then they don't pay half their mortgage for a match-day ticket.

As a fan of a lower-league football club, I have never really been affected by multi-million pound contracts stopping me from watching my team. For a supporter of a Premiership side this could be the start of a whole new phenomenon. Let's hope for the sake of football in this country that we can start to watch world-class football at an acceptable, affordable price. Actually scratch that - why can't we go back to the 1960s when (in football terms certainly) everything was well with the world: World Champions, an open First Division championship and a world in which a defender could make a proper sliding tackle...

For more sports stories like this visit my sports blog at http://sportingtommytrebski.blogspot.com/