Journalists in most contemporary societies have the freedom to express their opinions and thoughts through the use of the media. The Internet is frequently the chosen media for journalists to express their ideas due to its speed and also its popularity. However, although the Internet has become more accessible to most people, people who publish articles on the Internet are often not aware of media law obligations. Media law issues that involve publications on the Internet are highly contentious due to obligations that journalists have to the Journalism Code of Ethics. Furthermore, due to the Internet being a device that is for global use, this also causes complications because of foreign laws and regulations.
Firstly, the issue of contempt is not only applicable to Internet journalists, but is also applicable to the public. Contempt, often defined as 'Open disrespect or willful disobedience of the authority of a court of law or legislative body.' is debatable due to journalists also having an obligation to protect the identity and privacy of the individual. For example, in the recent case of Gerard McManus and Michael Harvey working in the Canberra, Australia's bureau of News Limited's Herald Sun (Rose 2005, p: 1), these two journalists face jail terms after refusing to disclose their source's identity. Although some would argue that disobedience of the law should result in punishment, other academics suggest that ethical issues that surround this situation should be considered. Ethical issues such as freedom of speech and the ability to be opinionated is crucial to a journalist's career, hence it is often argued that issues concerning contempt of the courtroom should only apply to journalists in certain circumstances.
Secondly, issues such as defamation have become a lot more common with increased publications on the Internet. For example, a website that may be viewed as opinionated by one person may be considered to be defamatory by another person. Defamation is commonly defined as 'An act of communication that causes someone to be shamed, ridiculed, held in contempt, lowered in the estimation of the community, or to lose employment status or earnings or otherwise suffer a damaged reputation. Such defamation is couched in 'defamatory language'. Libel and slander are defamation.' (Lexicon, 2005 p: 1). Thus, people who are publishing opinions on the Internet may find themselves in trouble with the law if their article is viewed as defamatory. For example, in the case study of Dow Jones v. Gutnik, one source quoting "Mr. Gutnik had taken action [for libel] against the US-based
News service for an article on the Barron's website hosted by The Wall Street Journal." (Vangelova 2002, p: 2) shows circumstances where a News station may be sued for defamation.
Also, the issue of copyright laws regarding the publication of materials also applies to journalists. Webpages that have materials that are considered to be defamatory in nature can result in the publisher facing defamation charges. Also, with the popularity of the Internet increasing, this may mean that foreign laws from other nations need to be respected and adhered to. For example, in countries such as Singapore who have strict regulations, the government may censor materials that do not respect these laws, and the publisher may face charges. The dilemma with media laws affecting the Internet is that the Internet is a global community that reaches all nations, and people with different discourses. Every culture's discourses as well as their paradigms must be taken into consideration. However, many journalists would argue that this is not possible with the Internet as they do not know where the materials will be published, and the type of audience who will read the article. Hence, although there are circumstances of which the Australian court will make allowances for being ignorant of the law, journalists are warned and should know the law before publishing any articles on the Internet.
In conclusion, disobedience of laws and regulations such as defamation and copyright issues may result in breaches of the rule of law. Although most journalists argue that they have a responsibility to provide accurate information and to inform the public, the law does not have allowances for this excuse and journalists may find themselves facing penalties such as jail terms or fines if they do not know the law.
Bibliography: Gratten Michelle and Rose Elizabeth 2005, Australia: MPs back journalist pair facing contempt charges, http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article-pacificislands.asp?parentid =29764. Lexicon 2005, Legal Definition of Defamation. http://www.lectlaw.com/def/d021.htm
About the author:
Written By Bernice Ly http://www.m6.net Bernice Ly is a technical writer working at M6.Net: 'The web-hosting company for humans.' M6.Net is working hard to help humanity experience the power and freedom to develop their own part of the Internet, to share their information and connect with anyone, anywhere, anytime.
Written by: Bernice Ly
