Ulteriori informazioni
Domestic constitutions and courts applying international human rights conventions acknowledge the significance of the mass media for a democratic society, not only by granting special privileges but also by imposing enhanced duties and responsibilities to journalists and media companies. However, the challenges of media convergence, media ownership concentration and the internet have led to legal uncertainty. Should media privileges be maintained, and, if so, how is 'the media' to be defined? To what extent does media freedom as a legal concept also encompass bloggers who have not undertaken journalistic education? And how can a legal distinction be drawn between investigative journalism on the one hand and reporting on purely private matters on the other? To answer these questions, Jan Oster combines doctrinal and conceptual comparative analysis with descriptive and normative theory, and argues in favour of a media freedom principle based on the significance of the media for public discourse.
Info autore
Jan Oster is Assistant Professor for EU Law and Institutions at Leiden University, the Netherlands. He also holds a lectureship for telecommunications law and private international media law at the Mainz Media Institute, Germany.
Riassunto
The professional media enjoys greater protection than private individuals when preparing or publishing speech. The best-known example is the right of journalists to keep their sources confidential. Jan Oster explores whether these privileges are still justified, and how 'journalists' are actually to be defined in the internet age.
