Impact of Censorship Laws on Freedom of Expression in the UK Media

This essay delves into the intricacies of freedom of expression within the United Kingdom's media landscape, examining the legal framework that both protects and restricts it. It begins by defining freedom of expression as a constitutionally sanctioned right, referencing the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998, and illustrating its importance in a democratic society. The essay then explores various restrictions on this right, including those related to national security, public order, the protection of individual rights, and the prevention of hate speech. A significant portion of the essay is dedicated to the Obscene Publications Act and its application in the digital age, outlining the criteria for determining obscenity and the defenses available. Furthermore, the essay addresses recent developments in privacy law and their impact on freedom of expression, alongside the applicability of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and other censorship laws. The analysis includes relevant case law, such as Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and Observer and The Guardian v United Kingdom, to provide a comprehensive understanding of the subject.

Running head: MEDIA CONTENT AND CONTROL
MEDIA CONTENT AND CONTROL
Name of Student
Name of University
Author Note

2MEDIA CONTENT AND CONTROL
Effect of Censorship Law in the Freedom of Expression in the United Kingdom
Introduction
Freedom of expression in the United Kingdom is a constitutionally sanctioned right granted
to the people. The freedom of expression grants the citizens the right to hold opinions and the
right for exchanging ideas and information without any public authorities interfering.
Although the rights of the people in the United Kingdom towards their freedom of expression
is protected by law, yet, it is considered to be a qualified right, which makes it easier for
being overridden in certain specific situations. One such situation is in relation to media and
broadcasting. The broadcasters in the United Kingdom, including the foreign broadcasters,
are required to be following the European Union laws and the national and state legislations
of the United Kingdom for broadcasting contents in the country.1 This paper will discuss in
detail about the existence of freedom of expression in the United Kingdom and the
restrictions provided against by way of legislation. The paper will further discuss about the
relevance of the regulations related to obscene publications in the current times. This paper
will further discuss about the recent developments in the Human Rights Act 19982 in relation
to the laws of privacy and freedom of expression. In this paper the readers will also be
provided with an insight to the applicability of the Article 10 of the European Convention on
Human Rights3.
Freedom of Expression
Freedom of expression can be defined as the right provided to the individuals for expressing
the ideas, thoughts, beliefs and emotions in regard to different issues without any kind of
Censorship from the Government. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights defines
freedom of expression as the right that every individual is entitled to for holding any opinion
1 Scanlon, T., 2018. A Theory of Freedom of Expression 1. In Freedom of Speech (pp. 13-35). Routledge.
2 Human Rights Act 1998
3 European Convention on Human Rights

3MEDIA CONTENT AND CONTROL
or belief or to exchange ideas, information without any kind of interference. The right to
freedom of expression has been considered as a significant human right which in turn is
considered to be crucial part for a democratic society4. By way of freedom of expression the
individuals are given the right to exchange ideas, information and opinions and helps in
providing the members of the society to be forming their opinions on the matters that can be
considered as important to the public. By way of freedom of expression the idea of an
independent and free press is supported along with transparency in the functions of the states.
By way of freedom of expression the individuals are protected in every way through which
they can be expressing their views despite of the tone in which the message was conveyed or
the content in the message. The law on freedom of expression can be observed to be covering
every space, purpose, media or form that is available for individuals to be expressing their
views. By way of the right to freedom of expression individuals are protected from any kind
of unjustified restriction that the government might place on the individuals expressing their
opinions. Freedom of expression in the United Kingdom is a constitutionally sanctioned right
granted to the people5. In the United Kingdom the right to freedom of expression has been
granted to the individuals by way of the provisions of the European Convention on Human
Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998. Article 10 of the Human Rights Act6 provides
protection to the individuals for holding their opinions and for expressing them in a free
manner, without any kind of restriction or interference from the government7. The provisions
of the freedom of expression can be understood with the judgment in the Reynolds v Times
Newspapers Ltd [2001] 2 AC 1278. This is a case of defamation under the provisions of the
4 Harris, D.J., O'Boyle, M., Bates, E. and Buckley, C., 2014. Harris, O'Boyle & Warbrick: Law of the European
convention on human rights. Oxford University Press, USA.
5 Voorhoof, D., 2015. Freedom of expression and the right to information: Implications for copyright.
In Research Handbook on Human Rights and Intellectual Property. Edward Elgar Publishing.
6 Human Rights Act 1998, art 10
7Equality and Human Rights Commission ‘Article 10: Freedom of Expression’ -
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/y-ddeddf-hawliau-dynol/article-10-freedomexpression - accessed 30
December 2019
8 Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd [2001] 2 AC 127

4MEDIA CONTENT AND CONTROL
English law in regard to the privilege that the press had for publishing any statement that can
be considered to be defamatory. The judges in the case stated that the journalists have their
duties for publishing any allegation even if such allegation is later found out to be wrong. The
protection can be observed to include the expression of the views by way of publishing any
kind of books, articles or leaflets, by way of broadcasts through radio or television, artistic
works and through social media and internet. However these protections also have certain
restrictions.
The right to freedom of expression is vital for anyone working in the field of journalism and
media. This freedom gives them the right to criticize the government and any other institution
without any kind of fear for getting prosecuted. The freedom to criticize the government is
considered a very important feature that proves a society to be democratic9. An important
example of the freedom of expression of the press can be observed in the case of Observer
and The Guardian v United Kingdom [1991]10. In the case, The Guardian and the Observer,
two famous newspapers, were seen as publishing the excerpts from the famous book of Peter
Wright named the Spycatcher. The excerpt was seen as including an allegation that there
have been unlawful actions from MI5. A court order was obtained by the government which
prevented the newspapers from publishing any for the material until the end of any
proceeding that was going on for a breach of confidence. At the time of the publishing of the
book, the newspapers complain that if the court orders continued it would infringe the right to
freedom of expression. However, the complaint was rejected by the European Court of
Human Rights on the grounds that as the order was in the interest of the security of the nation
therefore the court order would be considered as lawful. However, contradictorily the
European Court of Human Rights also stated that after the publication of the book, the ban on
9Equality and Human Rights Commission ‘Article 10: Freedom of Expression’ -
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/y-ddeddf-hawliau-dynol/article-10-freedomexpression - accessed 30
December 2019
10 Observer and The Guardian v United Kingdom [1991]

5MEDIA CONTENT AND CONTROL
the publication of the newspaper article would not be reasonable as the information published
is not confidential anymore.
Restrictions to the Freedom of Expression
There are certain restrictions to the rights of the individuals on freedom of expression
when it comes to the legislations in the United Kingdom. Apart from being entitled for
having certain rights, every citizen has certain duties to follow. These duties include the duty
of behaving in a responsible way and to be respecting the rights of other individuals.11 The
rights of the individuals can be restricted by the public authorities if it can be proved that thee
restriction is necessary and lawful and is in proportion for protecting the security and the
integrity of the nation and its territories and for protecting the safety of the public; for
preventing crime disorders, for protecting the reputes and privileges of individuals;
maintaining the ability and neutrality of judges; preventing the exposé of information that has
been received in buoyancy; and protecting the morals and the health of the individuals.
The authority figures might also be allowed to restrict the freedom of expression of an
individual if those expressions can be observed as encouraging hatred towards any race or
religion. The provisions for the prohibition of hate speech have been provided in many of the
legislations in United Kingdom. Section 4 of the Public Order Act 198612 describes hate
speech to be an offence. As per the section, if an individual uses any behaviour for any word
in a threatening, abusive or in an insulting way that might cause any type of distress or
harassment to any person then it would be considered as a hate speech and an offence under
this section. Over the years the legislation has been revised for including any kind of speech
of hatred towards the race, religion, sexual orientation or which encourages terrorism.
Although the right to freedom of expression provides the journalist and media to criticize
11 Freedom of Expression & Media (Forms of Restriction) http://www.cilvektiesibugids.lv/en/themes/freedom-
of-expression-media/freedom-ofexpression/lawful-restrictions/forms-of-restrictions - accessed 30 December
2019
12 Public Order Act 1986, s4

6MEDIA CONTENT AND CONTROL
government however, the state might impose any restriction it finds valid on the media for
protecting other human rights like the right of a person towards the respect of their private
life. In the judgment of News Verlags GMBH and Cokg v Austria [2000] ECHR 513 it was
held that the rights of freedom of expression mentioned in article 10 would also be including
the right of choosing not only the content but also the form in which the expression is
required to be made. According to the judgement the courts do not have the authority to
substitute their views with regard to the views of the press in the matters of the techniques or
styles which the journalists should adopt for reporting any incident. The protection laid by
article 10 does not only cover the substance or the content of the information or idea but also
the method in which the idea or the information is required to be conveyed.
Obscene Publication Regulations
Under the English law the press and print media of the United Kingdom and also the general
public are provided with the ability to express themselves freely. However there are certain
restrictions. The restrictions that are imposed by the government on the right of individuals
towards their freedom of expression can be seen as relating to any kind of material or
publication that is indecent or obscene or is on the ground of someone's race or religion. The
restrictions can be seen as governed by way of the legislations like the Obscene Publications
Act 195914, the Obscene Publications Act 196415, the Public Order Act 198616, the Racial and
Religious Hatred Act 200617, and the Indecent Displays (Controls) Act 198118. As per section
1 of the Obscene Publications Act 195919 a test has been set out for finding the level of
obscenity in any article. According to the section any article will be considered to be obscene,
if the overall effect of that article is either depraving or corrupting any individual who might
13 News Verlags GMBH and Cokg v Austria [2000] ECHR 5
14 Obscene Publications Act 1959
15 Obscene Publications Act 1964
16 Public Order Act 1986
17 Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006
18 Indecent Displays (Controls) Act 1981
19 Obscene Publications Act 1959, s 4

7MEDIA CONTENT AND CONTROL
be considered as reading, watching or hearing the subject matter that is present in the article.
Articles, as per the provisions of the section, include any kind of films, magazines, pictures,
books, video or audio recordings or any information that has been kept in an electronic form.
the only exemption under the provisions of this legislation are the transmission from
television and radio. Obscene Publications Act can be seen as being applicable to any type of
media. This act covers any article, comment or any kind of chat that will be considered
obscene which has been published on the internet and in any other digital media.
Application of the Regulation
For application of this section the article is needed to be examined in its entirety. The whole
of the article is needed to be examined for deciding whether the content can be construed as
being obscene. However in certain cases in which the articles are constructed with different
elements then each of the elements are required to be examined to find out whether the article
can be considered as obscene either on the basis of a single article or on the entirety of the
content of that article. It is also required for the article to be depraving or corrupting any
individual coming in contact with the article for considering the article to be obscene. Some
examples of such obscenity include necrophilia, bestiality or rape20. For considering in article
to be obscene, it is also required to consider the likely audience who might come in contact
with the article in question. Examples of such audiences include the viewers who might
watch the film or any reader who might read the magazine or newspaper.
Defence of Obscenity
The defence to this provision has been provided in the section 4 of the Obscene Publications
Act 195921. In this section has been provided that any person would not be convicted of an
offence a publishing any kind of obscene material and there would be no forfeiture order
20 In Brief, ‘Freedom of Expression: obscene, indecent, racially or religiously offensive material’ -
https://www.inbrief.co.uk/media-law/freedom-of-expression/ (Date Unknown) - accessed 30 December 2019
21 Obscene Publications Act 1959, s 4

8MEDIA CONTENT AND CONTROL
made against the individual if it is proof that the article that has been published can be
considered as justified for the good of the public as it is in the interest of any concern of the
science, arts, literature or learning or any other general concern objects. This is known as the
defence of public good.
Privacy and Freedom of Expression
Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 199822 can be seen as dealing with the right to privacy of
an individual. As per this article it has been stated that every person has the right of being
respected for the private and family life they have and their home and correspondence as
well. However, there have been controversies in regard to the balance between the right to
privacy of a person and the right of freedom of expression. By way of the right of freedom of
expression people are allowed to hold opinions and exchange information and ideas without
any kind of interference23. These two rights have always been at odds with each other. One of
the major cases that can be e taken as example in the situation is the Campbell v Mirror
Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] UKHL 2224. In the given case the famous model Naomi
Campbell admin photography rehabilitation clinic why it there was a public denial of her
being a recovering drug addict. Claims of damages was sought by Campbell and a further
claim of breach of confidence under article 6 of the Human Rights Act 199825 was also
instigated by the the lawyers in compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights.
The courts were observed to be engaging in a test of balance for the determination of whether
there has been any breach of privacy under the article 8 and whether such breach would
interfere with the freedom of expression under article 10. In the test it was held that the right
to privacy of the plaintiff outweighed the right to freedom of expression of the defendant.
22 Human Rights Act 1998, art 8
23 The Telegraph - Privacy vs Freedom of expression: How has the law developed? Josie Timms, ‘Why is Free
Speech Important?’ https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2016/04/free-speech-important/ (13 April 2016) -
accessed 2 December 2019
24 Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] UKHL 22
25 Human Rights Act 1998, art 6

9MEDIA CONTENT AND CONTROL
Another example that can be considered in this regard is the case of Mosley v United
Kingdom [2011] 53 E.H.R.R. 3026. In this case the requirement of Article 8 to be legislating
the member states of the European Union for the prevention of the newspaper from printing
any news article in regard to the private life of any individual without any kind of warning to
that concerned individual was unanimously rejected by the court.
Applicability of freedom of expression of offensive materials
As discussed earlier the freedom of expression mentioned in article 10 of the Human Rights
Act do not apply to any material that is offensive to the race or religion of any individual. The
authority figures might be allowed to restrict the freedom of expression of an individual if
those expressions can be observed as encouraging hatred towards any race or religion.
Relevancy of Censorship laws in the modern age
United Kingdom can be said to be having a long history towards the stringent laws on
censorship. As per many reports it has been suggested that the regulations that are in place for
media and broadcast cannot be considered to be fit for the modern age27. The right to freedom
of speech and the right of freedom of press, that are considered to be the vital pillars of a
democratic state, have been in great peril of being sacrificed in the recent times. They have
been many compromises undermined towards the ability of the journalists to perform their
main role. Many times the journal is are observed to be paying the public officials for
information. This is considered as being a criminal offence28. Not just the journalists, even the
common citizens can be seen as being subject to the censorship laws that have been placed.
26Mosley v United Kingdom [2011] 53 E.H.R.R. 30
27 Jim Waterson, The Guardian “BBC Chair: UK Media Regulation is no longer fit for modern age”, (17 March
2019): https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/mar/17/bbcchair-uk-media-regulation-is-no-longer-fit-for-
modern-age - accessed on 30 December 2019
28 Tim Crook, “Rights to Freedom of Expression won by Journalists over centuries have been lost in a few
years” - https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/rights-to-freedom-ofexpression-won-by-journalists-over-centuries-
have-been-lost-in-a-few-years - (29 January 2015) – accessed 30 December 2019.

10MEDIA CONTENT AND CONTROL
Conclusion
This paper has discussed in detail about the existence of freedom of expression in the United
Kingdom and the restrictions provided against by way of legislation. Freedom of expression
in the United Kingdom is a constitutionally authorized right approved to the people for the
right to hold opinions and the right for trading ideas and information without any public
authorities prying. The rights of the individuals can be restricted by the public authorities if it
can be proved that thee restriction is necessary and lawful. The paper has further discussed
about the relevance of the regulations related to obscene publications in the current times. Er
Under the Obscene Publications Act 1959 any material that can corrupt any person by
viewing them anything that is improper is known as obscene. This paper has also discussed
about the recent developments in the Human Rights Act 1998 in relation to the laws of
privacy and freedom of expression. In the United Kingdom, often times there is a conflict
between a person’s right to privacy and another person’s right to freedom of expression. In
this paper the readers were also provided with an insight to the applicability of the Article 10
of the European Convention on Human Rights on the offensive materials. There are certain
restrictions to the provision. Freedom of expression of offensive materials is also considered
as being restricted. From the above discussion it can be concluded that although there are
certain drawbacks and limitations towards an individual’s basic human right of free speech
and expression yet, it cannot be said that the censorship laws affect completely in a negative
way towards the freedom of expression of any individual.

11MEDIA CONTENT AND CONTROL
Reference
Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] UKHL 22
Equality and Human Rights Commission ‘Article 10: Freedom of Expression’ -
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/y-ddeddf-hawliau-dynol/article-10-
freedomexpression - accessed 30 December 2019
European Convention on Human Rights
Freedom of Expression & Media (Forms of Restriction)
http://www.cilvektiesibugids.lv/en/themes/freedom-of-expression-media/freedom-
ofexpression/lawful-restrictions/forms-of-restrictions - accessed 30 December 2019
Harris, D.J., O'Boyle, M., Bates, E. and Buckley, C., 2014. Harris, O'Boyle & Warbrick: Law
of the European convention on human rights. Oxford University Press, USA.
Human Rights Act 1998
In Brief, ‘Freedom of Expression: obscene, indecent, racially or religiously offensive
material’ - https://www.inbrief.co.uk/media-law/freedom-of-expression/ (Date Unknown) -
accessed 30 December 2019
Indecent Displays (Controls) Act 1981
Jim Waterson, The Guardian “BBC Chair: UK Media Regulation is no longer fit for modern
age”, (17 March 2019): https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/mar/17/bbcchair-uk-
media-regulation-is-no-longer-fit-for-modern-age - accessed on 30 December 2019
Mosley v United Kingdom [2011] 53 E.H.R.R. 30
News Verlags GMBH and Cokg v Austria [2000] ECHR 5

12MEDIA CONTENT AND CONTROL
Obscene Publications Act 1959
Obscene Publications Act 1964
Observer and The Guardian v United Kingdom [1991]
Public Order Act 1986
Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006
Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd [2001] 2 AC 127
Scanlon, T., 2018. A Theory of Freedom of Expression 1. In Freedom of Speech (pp. 13-35).
Routledge.
The Telegraph - Privacy vs Freedom of expression: How has the law developed? Josie
Timms, ‘Why is Free Speech Important?’ https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2016/04/free-
speech-important/ (13 April 2016) - accessed 2 December 2019
Tim Crook, “Rights to Freedom of Expression won by Journalists over centuries have been
lost in a few years” - https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/rights-to-freedom-ofexpression-won-by-
journalists-over-centuries-have-been-lost-in-a-few-years - (29 January 2015) – accessed 30
December 2019.
Voorhoof, D., 2015. Freedom of expression and the right to information: Implications for
copyright. In Research Handbook on Human Rights and Intellectual Property. Edward Elgar
Publishing.