header-logo header-logo

20 January 2017 / Athelstane Aamodt
Issue: 7730 / Categories: Features , Media
printer mail-detail

Broadcast news

nlj_7730_aamodt_

Athelstane Aamodt provides a media law update

  • ​Ofcom announces its intention to end its “major parties” list; broadcasters given more freedom.

  • Wade v British Sky Broadcasting Limited : The Court of Appeal deals with the rare instance of a television format case.

Ofcom (the Office of Communications, ie the media regulator in the UK) has published a consultation paper (10 November 2016) that makes two important proposals:

i. Larger parties

Ofcom’s list of larger political parties varies depending on which part of the UK one is considering, but very broadly the Ofcom list includes the Conservatives, Labour, the Liberal Democrats, UKIP, and the SNP, and these parties must be given “due weight”. Ofcom is proposing to cease using the large party definition and to give broadcasters editorial freedom to use their own information and judgment on this issue. To understand why this will matter, it is necessary to look at the rules governing political advertising.

In the UK wall-to-wall political advertising on television and radio is (mercifully) prohibited. Sections 319(2)(g) and 321(2) of the Communications

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll