Freedom of expression, frontpage, Germany, hate speech
Article{Tworek2019,
title = {An Analysis of Germany’s NetzDG Law},
author = {Tworek, H., and Leerssen, P.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/NetzDG_Tworek_Leerssen_April_2019.pdf},
year = {0418},
date = {2019-04-18},
keywords = {Freedom of expression, frontpage, Germany, hate speech},
} algoritmes, conspiracy theories, Fake news, fakenews, Freedom of expression, frontpage
Article{Harambam2017,
title = {De/politisering van de Waarheid: Complottheorieën, alternatieve feiten en nepnieuws in het tijdperk van de postwaarheid},
author = {Harambam, J.},
url = {https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/aup/soc/2017/00000013/00000001/art00007#},
doi = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5117/SOC2017.1.HARA},
year = {1123},
date = {2018-11-23},
journal = {Sociologie},
volume = {13},
number = {1},
pages = {73-92},
abstract = {The Truth dominates many public discussions today. Conventional truths from established epistemic authorities about all sorts of issues, from climate change to terrorist attacks, are increasingly challenged by ordinary citizens and presidents alike. Many have therefore proclaimed that we have entered a post-truth era: a world in which objective facts are no longer relevant. Media and politics speak in alarmist discourse about how fake news, conspiracy theories and alternative facts threaten democratic societies by destabilizing the Truth ‐ a clear sign of a moral panic. In this essay, I firstly explore what sociological changes have led to (so much commotion about) the alleged demise of the Truth. In contrast to the idea that we have moved beyond it, I argue that we are amidst public battles about the Truth: at stake is who gets to decide over that and why. I then discuss and criticize the dominant counter reaction (re-establishing the idea of one objective and irrefutable truth), which I see as an unsuccessful de-politisation strategy. Basing myself on research and experiments with epistemic democracy in the field of science studies, I end with a more effective and democratic alternative of how to deal with knowledge in the complex information landscape of today.},
keywords = {algoritmes, conspiracy theories, Fake news, fakenews, Freedom of expression, frontpage},
} case law, European Court of Human Rights, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Journalism, Media law
Book{McGonagle2018,
title = {Freedom of Expression, the Media and Journalists: Case-law of the European Court of Human Rights},
author = {McGonagle, T. and Voorhoof, D.},
url = {https://rm.coe.int/freedom-of-expression-the-media-and-journalists-iris-themes-vol-iii-de/16807c1181},
year = {0517},
date = {2018-05-17},
abstract = {This e-book provides valuable insights into the European Court of Human Rights’ extensive case-law on freedom of expression and media and journalistic freedoms. With well over 30,000 downloads, the first three editions of the e-book (2013, 2015 and 2016) have proved hugely successful. The new fourth edition summarises over 270 judgments or decisions by the Court and provides hyperlinks to the full text of each of the summarised judgments or decisions (via HUDOC, the Court\'s online case-law database). For an optimal navigational experience, one should download the e-book and read the technical tips on p. 3.},
keywords = {case law, European Court of Human Rights, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Journalism, Media law},
} chilling effect, defamation, electronic publishing, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Human rights, liability, online reader comments
Article{Fahy2017b,
title = {The Chilling Effect of Liability for Online Reader Comments},
author = {Fahy, R.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/EHRLR_2017_4.pdf},
year = {0824},
date = {2017-08-24},
journal = {European Human Rights Law Review},
volume = {2017},
number = {4},
pages = {387-393},
abstract = {This article assesses how the European Court of Human Rights has responded to the argument that holding online news media liable for reader comments has a chilling effect on freedom of expression. The article demonstrates how the Court first responded by dismissing the argument, and focused on the apparent lack of evidence for any such chilling effect. The article then argues that the Court has moved away from its initial rejection, and now accepts that a potential chilling effect, even without evidence, is integral to deciding whether online news media should be liable for reader comments. Finally, the article argues that this latter view is consistent with the Court’s precedent in other areas of
freedom of expression law where a similar chilling effect may also arise.},
keywords = {chilling effect, defamation, electronic publishing, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Human rights, liability, online reader comments},
} case law, EHRM, Freedom of expression, frontpage, protection of morals
Article{McGonagle2017b,
title = {Annotatie bij EHRM 22 november 2016 (Kaos GL / Turkije)},
author = {McGonagle, T.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Annotatie_EHRC_2017_6.pdf},
year = {0530},
date = {2017-05-30},
journal = {European Human Right Cases},
number = {6},
keywords = {case law, EHRM, Freedom of expression, frontpage, protection of morals},
} case law, European Court of Human Rights, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Journalism, Media law
Book{McGonagle2017b,
title = {Freedom of Expression, the Media and Journalists: Case-law of the European Court of Human Rights},
author = {McGonagle, T. and Voorhoof, D.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/IRISThemesVolIII_2016.pdf},
year = {0413},
date = {2017-04-13},
abstract = {This e-book provides valuable insights into the European Court of Human Rights’ extensive case-law on freedom of expression and media and journalistic freedoms. With 30,000 downloads, the first and second editions of the e-book (2013, 2015) have proved hugely successful. The new updated edition summarises over 250 judgments or decisions by the Court and provides hyperlinks to the full text of each of the summarised judgments or decisions (via HUDOC, the Court\'s online case-law database). The latest edition of the e-book is also available in French and in German.
For an optimal navigational experience, one should download the e-book and read the technical tips on p. 3.},
keywords = {case law, European Court of Human Rights, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Journalism, Media law},
} CIA, Data protection, e-Privacy regulation, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Internet, Privacy, Smart TV
Article{Irion2017b,
title = {The Weeping Angels are back, and they attack our privacy via smart TVs},
author = {Irion, K. and Helberger, N.},
url = {https://policyreview.info/articles/news/weeping-angels-are-back-and-they-attack-our-privacy-smart-tvs/451},
year = {0310},
date = {2017-03-10},
keywords = {CIA, Data protection, e-Privacy regulation, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Internet, Privacy, Smart TV},
} Criminal Conviction, Dutch Law, Freedom of expression, Freedom of Speech, frontpage, Personal data, Privacy, right to be forgotten, Search Engine, Sensitive Data, Special Categories of Data
Chapter{Kulk2017,
title = {Privacy, Freedom of Expression, and the Right to Be Forgotten in Europe},
author = {Kulk, S. and Zuiderveen Borgesius, F.},
url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2923722},
year = {0302},
date = {2017-03-02},
abstract = {In this chapter we discuss the relation between privacy and freedom of expression in Europe. In principle, the two rights have equal weight in Europe – which right prevails depends on the circumstances of a case. We use the Google Spain judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union, sometimes called the ‘right to be forgotten’ judgment, to illustrate the difficulties when balancing the two rights. The court decided in Google Spain that people have, under certain conditions, the right to have search results for their name delisted. We discuss how Google and Data Protection Authorities deal with such delisting requests in practice. Delisting requests illustrate that balancing privacy and freedom of expression interests will always remain difficult.},
keywords = {Criminal Conviction, Dutch Law, Freedom of expression, Freedom of Speech, frontpage, Personal data, Privacy, right to be forgotten, Search Engine, Sensitive Data, Special Categories of Data},
} authors, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Intellectual property, intellectual property right, open content policies, publishers
Report{vanEechoud2017b,
title = {A publisher’s intellectual property right: Implications for freedom of expression, authors and open content policies},
author = {van Eechoud, M.},
url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/OFE_Implications_of_publishers_right.pdf},
year = {0119},
date = {2017-01-19},
keywords = {authors, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Intellectual property, intellectual property right, open content policies, publishers},
} case law, defamation, European Court of Human Rights, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Vrijheid van meningsuiting
Book{McGonagle2016,
title = {Freedom of expression and defamation: A study of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights},
author = {McGonagle, T.},
url = {https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016806ac95b},
year = {1004},
date = {2016-10-04},
abstract = {Freedom of expression is a fundamental freedom, one of the cornerstones of democracy in Europe, enshrined in various key texts, including the European Convention on Human Rights. But the boundaries between freedom to criticise and damaging a person’s honour or reputation are not always very clear. By defining public insults and defamation, the law can set limits on freedom of expression, which is neither absolute nor boundless. But how far can it go?
This study examines the details of the European Court of Human Right’s case law on defamation. It explores a range of substantive and procedural issues that the Court has considered, and clarifies the concept of defamation, positioning it in relation to freedom of expression and public debate. It explains how overly protective defamation laws can have a chilling effect on freedom of expression and public debate, and discusses the proportionality of defamation laws and their application.},
keywords = {case law, defamation, European Court of Human Rights, Freedom of expression, frontpage, Vrijheid van meningsuiting},
}