Two recent decisions - one in England, the other in New York - raise the fundamental question how far bloggers are entitled to communicate their views without disclosing their identity. The US Supreme Court has upheld a right to speak anonymously; there are good arguments both for and against recognition of this freedom. A qualified right to speak anonymously can be justified on the same argument which supports the privilege claimed by journalists not to disclose their sources: without its recognition some people will be deterred from contributing to public debate either by acting as citizen-journalists or by giving the media information for it to publish. In this context, it is difficult to explain the decision of The Times to identify an anonymous blogger.
Document Type: Commentary
Publication date: December 1, 2009
More about this publication?
The only platform for focused, rigorous analysis of global developments in media law, this new peer-reviewed journal is:
essential for teaching and research
essential for practice
essential for policy-making.
It turns the spotlight on all those aspects of law which impinge on and shape modern media practices - from regulation and ownership, to libel law and constitutional aspects of broadcasting such as free speech and privacy, obscenity laws, copyright, piracy, and other aspects of IT law. The result is the first journal to take a serious view of law through the lens.