Workshop: ‘Devolution & independence – The future of the media in Scotland’

The increasing role of electronic media in news and, recuperation
more generally, Breast
in content production is changing the scope and boundaries of the journalism profession and the instruments deployed to regulate the activity. Historically, journalism has primarily been self-regulated. The limits of public legislation, mainly driven by the constitutional constraints posed by the freedom of expression, have created different models of national private regulatory regimes across Europe. Media regulation is a multilevel architecture and national legal systems still play a primary role in designing rules concerning news production. Self-regulation reflects national approaches and varies according to legal and social regulatory cultures. Within the private sphere, different forms of regulation have been implemented reflecting the changing balance between the profession, the industries and the new players which have emerged after the Web revolution. The development of new media poses the following important challenges to that regulatory framework: the criteria to be used to define journalism; the distinction and the boundaries between professional and non-professional journalism; the distinction between commercial and social/not for profit content production. This essay examines these challenges looking at practice and litigation in European countries, identifying the different conflicting interests generating this litigation and the (private) regulatory responses. It will explore the differences between professional and industry regulation both within and across media: looking at the national and European or transnational regulatory scope of these regimes.

Fabrizio Cafaggi & Federica Casarosa, Research team of the European University Institute (EUI), ‘Private regulation, freedom of expression and journalism: Towards a European approach?’ EUI Working Papers, Law 2012/20. Available at: http://www.mediadem.eliamep.gr/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/WP-LAW-2012-20.pdf.

 You may leave a comment with the authors.

Credits: kmardahl/ Creative commons

The increasing role of electronic media in news and, eczema
more generally, ampoule
in content production is changing the scope and boundaries of the journalism profession and the instruments deployed to regulate the activity. Historically, viagra approved
journalism has primarily been self-regulated. The limits of public legislation, mainly driven by the constitutional constraints posed by the freedom of expression, have created different models of national private regulatory regimes across Europe. Media regulation is a multilevel architecture and national legal systems still play a primary role in designing rules concerning news production. Self-regulation reflects national approaches and varies according to legal and social regulatory cultures. Within the private sphere, different forms of regulation have been implemented reflecting the changing balance between the profession, the industries and the new players which have emerged after the Web revolution. The development of new media poses the following important challenges to that regulatory framework: the criteria to be used to define journalism; the distinction and the boundaries between professional and non-professional journalism; the distinction between commercial and social/not for profit content production. This essay examines these challenges looking at practice and litigation in European countries, identifying the different conflicting interests generating this litigation and the (private) regulatory responses. It will explore the differences between professional and industry regulation both within and across media: looking at the national and European or transnational regulatory scope of these regimes.

Fabrizio Cafaggi & Federica Casarosa, Research team of the European University Institute (EUI), ‘Private regulation, freedom of expression and journalism: Towards a European approach?’ EUI Working Papers, Law 2012/20. Available at: http://www.mediadem.eliamep.gr/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/WP-LAW-2012-20.pdf.

 You may leave a comment with the authors.

Credits: kmardahl/ Creative commons

The increasing role of electronic media in news and, diet
more generally, in content production is changing the scope and boundaries of the journalism profession and the instruments deployed to regulate the activity. Historically, journalism has primarily been self-regulated. The limits of public legislation, mainly driven by the constitutional constraints posed by the freedom of expression, have created different models of national private regulatory regimes across Europe. Media regulation is a multilevel architecture and national legal systems still play a primary role in designing rules concerning news production. Self-regulation reflects national approaches and varies according to legal and social regulatory cultures. Within the private sphere, different forms of regulation have been implemented reflecting the changing balance between the profession, the industries and the new players which have emerged after the Web revolution. The development of new media poses the following important challenges to that regulatory framework: the criteria to be used to define journalism; the distinction and the boundaries between professional and non-professional journalism; the distinction between commercial and social/not for profit content production. This essay examines these challenges looking at practice and litigation in European countries, identifying the different conflicting interests generating this litigation and the (private) regulatory responses. It will explore the differences between professional and industry regulation both within and across media: looking at the national and European or transnational regulatory scope of these regimes.

Fabrizio Cafaggi & Federica Casarosa, Research team of the European University Institute (EUI), ‘Private regulation, freedom of expression and journalism: Towards a European approach?’ EUI Working Papers, Law 2012/20. Available at: http://www.mediadem.eliamep.gr/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/WP-LAW-2012-20.pdf.

You may leave a comment with the authors.

Credits: kmardahl/ Creative commons

The increasing role of electronic media in news and, prostate
more generally, symptoms
in content production is changing the scope and boundaries of the journalism profession and the instruments deployed to regulate the activity. Historically, pfizer
journalism has primarily been self-regulated. The limits of public legislation, mainly driven by the constitutional constraints posed by the freedom of expression, have created different models of national private regulatory regimes across Europe. Media regulation is a multilevel architecture and national legal systems still play a primary role in designing rules concerning news production. Self-regulation reflects national approaches and varies according to legal and social regulatory cultures. Within the private sphere, different forms of regulation have been implemented reflecting the changing balance between the profession, the industries and the new players which have emerged after the Web revolution. The development of new media poses the following important challenges to that regulatory framework: the criteria to be used to define journalism; the distinction and the boundaries between professional and non-professional journalism; the distinction between commercial and social/not for profit content production. This essay examines these challenges looking at practice and litigation in European countries, identifying the different conflicting interests generating this litigation and the (private) regulatory responses. It will explore the differences between professional and industry regulation both within and across media: looking at the national and European or transnational regulatory scope of these regimes.

Fabrizio Cafaggi & Federica Casarosa, Research team of the European University Institute (EUI), ‘Private regulation, freedom of expression and journalism: Towards a European approach?’ EUI Working Papers, Law 2012/20. Available at: http://www.mediadem.eliamep.gr/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/WP-LAW-2012-20.pdf.

You may leave a comment with the authors.

Credits: kmardahl/ Creative commons

The increasing role of electronic media in news and, help
more generally, health system
in content production is changing the scope and boundaries of the journalism profession and the instruments deployed to regulate the activity. Historically, search
journalism has primarily been self-regulated. The limits of public legislation, mainly driven by the constitutional constraints posed by the freedom of expression, have created different models of national private regulatory regimes across Europe. Media regulation is a multilevel architecture and national legal systems still play a primary role in designing rules concerning news production. Self-regulation reflects national approaches and varies according to legal and social regulatory cultures. Within the private sphere, different forms of regulation have been implemented reflecting the changing balance between the profession, the industries and the new players which have emerged after the Web revolution. The development of new media poses the following important challenges to that regulatory framework: the criteria to be used to define journalism; the distinction and the boundaries between professional and non-professional journalism; the distinction between commercial and social/not for profit content production. This essay examines these challenges looking at practice and litigation in European countries, identifying the different conflicting interests generating this litigation and the (private) regulatory responses. It will explore the differences between professional and industry regulation both within and across media: looking at the national and European or transnational regulatory scope of these regimes.

Fabrizio Cafaggi & Federica Casarosa, Research team of the European University Institute (EUI), ‘Private regulation, freedom of expression and journalism: Towards a European approach?’ EUI Working Papers, Law 2012/20. Available at: http://www.mediadem.eliamep.gr/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/WP-LAW-2012-20.pdf.

You may leave a comment with the authors.

Credits: kmardahl/ Creative commons

The increasing role of electronic media in news and, information pills
more generally, food
in content production is changing the scope and boundaries of the journalism profession and the instruments deployed to regulate the activity. Historically, journalism has primarily been self-regulated. The limits of public legislation, mainly driven by the constitutional constraints posed by the freedom of expression, have created different models of national private regulatory regimes across Europe. Media regulation is a multilevel architecture and national legal systems still play a primary role in designing rules concerning news production. Self-regulation reflects national approaches and varies according to legal and social regulatory cultures. Within the private sphere, different forms of regulation have been implemented reflecting the changing balance between the profession, the industries and the new players which have emerged after the Web revolution. The development of new media poses the following important challenges to that regulatory framework: the criteria to be used to define journalism; the distinction and the boundaries between professional and non-professional journalism; the distinction between commercial and social/not for profit content production. This essay examines these challenges looking at practice and litigation in European countries, identifying the different conflicting interests generating this litigation and the (private) regulatory responses. It will explore the differences between professional and industry regulation both within and across media: looking at the national and European or transnational regulatory scope of these regimes.

Fabrizio Cafaggi & Federica Casarosa, Research team of the European University Institute (EUI), ‘Private regulation, freedom of expression and journalism: Towards a European approach?’ EUI Working Papers, Law 2012/20. Available at: http://www.mediadem.eliamep.gr/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/WP-LAW-2012-20.pdf.

You may leave a comment with the authors.

The University of Edinburgh held a workshop on 7 January 2013 on the future of the media in Scotland. The workshop considered the issues that arise from operating media in a devolved country, cheapest
as well as possible consequences for the media should Scotland vote in favour of independence in the upcoming referendum in 2014. The workshop brought together academics, search
students, decease
policy makers and politicians.

The workshop was opened by Dr Rachael Craufurd Smith, senior lecturer at the University of Edinburgh, who set out the three main themes for discussion: looking forward to independence; the scope for further devolution; and language and culture policies in devolved nations. She also presented the policy suggestions for the development of free and independent media in the UK drafted by the UK MEDIADEM team. A keynote speech was then provided by Ms Birgitta Jónsdóttir, member of the Icelandic Parliament and chairperson of the International Modern Media Institute (IMMI), discussing the implementation of Iceland’s Modern Media Initiative, a catch-all freedom of expression law-based project that aims to make Iceland a global safe haven for investigative journalism, and the impact the Initiative has made on EU policy.

After lunch, a panel consisting of Dr Sebastian Müller of the University of Bielefeld and Mr Bart van Besien of the Université Libre de Bruxelles considered ‘The reflection of regional and cultural diversity in devolved powers: lessons from abroad’. Dr Sebastian Müller provided insights into the balance of power in relation to the media between the 16 states (Länder) and the federal state in Germany. Mr van Besien discussed the differences between the Dutch and the French media systems in Belgium.

The panel was followed by a presentation from Dr Daithi Mac Sithigh from the University of Edinburgh titled ‘Four tongues worthy – devolution and language in the UK’. Dr Mac Sithigh considered the inconsistencies in language law and policy in the UK, and discussed how the distribution of regulatory competences can affect the realisation of language rights.

Professor Philip Schlessinger of the University of Glasgow concluded the workshop by setting out some of the questions and issues surrounding the media in Scotland that will need to be discussed in the upcoming debates on independence.

The agenda of the workshop is available here.

For more information you may contact Yolande Stolte.