View all newsletters
Sign up for our free email newsletters

Fighting for quality news media in the digital age.

  1. Comment
August 15, 2014

Counter terrorism legislation and other new UK laws which can be used to hinder journalism

By Cleland Thom

The independent reviewer of terrorism legislation’s concerns about free speech (Guardian) provide another example of how the law is being used to stifle journalism.

David Anderson said last month that Britain’s strict counter-terrorism laws affected everybody from teenage tweeters to religious campaigners, because the term "terrorism activity" was too broad.

And he added: "They make people more cautious than they need to be in what they say and what they write.

"You could look at the example of journalists and bloggers, for example, who can be considered terrorists, it seems."

He had a valid point. And it’s a broader issue, too. Over the last 20 years, journalists have been indirectly affected by an unprecedented number of laws that were introduced for entirely separate reasons.

The Bribery Act affects journalists, even though it was intended to target corporations.

The Protection from Harassment Act affects photographers, even though it was intended to target stalkers.

Content from our partners
MHP Group's 30 To Watch awards for young journalists open for entries
How PA Media is helping newspapers make the digital transition
Publishing on the open web is broken, how generative AI could help fix it

The Religious Hatred Act and the Equality Act can affect media publishers, even though they are intended to tackle discrimination.

And then there’s the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, the Coroners and Justice Act, and more than four different pieces of terrorism legislation.

Did Parliament foresee the consequences for the media when it passed all these laws? If it didn’t, it was negligent. If it did, it ducked the opportunity to include "journalistic exemptions", in the interests of free speech.

We also have enforcement agencies that are eager to use any legislation they can find to hinder journalists doing their jobs.

This all represents a trend that violates press freedom. And the media has no constitutional protection.

We could, of course, use our adaptable and flexible unwritten constitution to provide a constitutional right to a free press, like they have in America.

Problem is, we’ve probably got a law against that, too.

Cleland Thom is a trainer and consultant in media law

Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our "Letters Page" blog

Select and enter your email address Weekly insight into the big strategic issues affecting the future of the news industry. Essential reading for media leaders every Thursday. Your morning brew of news about the world of news from Press Gazette and elsewhere in the media. Sent at around 10am UK time. Our weekly does of strategic insight about the future of news media aimed at US readers. A fortnightly update from the front-line of news and advertising. Aimed at marketers and those involved in the advertising industry.
  • Business owner/co-owner
  • CEO
  • COO
  • CFO
  • CTO
  • Chairperson
  • Non-Exec Director
  • Other C-Suite
  • Managing Director
  • President/Partner
  • Senior Executive/SVP or Corporate VP or equivalent
  • Director or equivalent
  • Group or Senior Manager
  • Head of Department/Function
  • Manager
  • Non-manager
  • Retired
  • Other
Visit our privacy Policy for more information about our services, how New Statesman Media Group may use, process and share your personal data, including information on your rights in respect of your personal data and how you can unsubscribe from future marketing communications.
Thank you

Thanks for subscribing.

Websites in our network