Element 68Element 45Element 44Element 63Element 64Element 43Element 41Element 46Element 47Element 69Element 76Element 62Element 61Element 81Element 82Element 50Element 52Element 79Element 79Element 7Element 8Element 73Element 74Element 17Element 16Element 75Element 13Element 12Element 14Element 15Element 31Element 32Element 59Element 58Element 71Element 70Element 88Element 88Element 56Element 57Element 54Element 55Element 18Element 20Element 23Element 65Element 21Element 22iconsiconsElement 83iconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsElement 84iconsiconsElement 36Element 35Element 1Element 27Element 28Element 30Element 29Element 24Element 25Element 2Element 1Element 66
Preventive State Intervention in Mass Media Internet Communication

Preventive State Intervention in Mass Media Internet Communication

As they apply to mass communication, exercising fundamental freedoms under the Basic Constitutional Law is subject to a particular protection under constitutional law, according to which the state is forbidden to intervene preventatively in processes of creativity and publication. This is, on one hand, guaranteed by the prohibition on censorship according to Article 5, paragraph 1 section 3 of the Basic Constitutional Law. On the other hand, particular principles under constitutional law apply, such as the „Press Immunity from Police Action“

The project tackles the question as to how far these principles prohibiting preventative influence by the state are transferable to Internet communication in the media. 

show more

Project Description

A point of departure for these considerations is the blocking decree of the Düsseldorf regional government against various access providers in Northrhine-Westfalia. After unsuccessful action against the content provides of an illegal Internet offering, there exists as a second step the possibility of obliging the access provider to block the content in question. This measure, merely reactive – and with that to be regarded as permissible censorship after the fact – could, however, be possibly considered as improper censorship or as a measure tantamount to censorship, on the basis of the particular circumstances existing in the internet, for instance, as regards the process of reception and publication. In the literature, initiatives are discernable, which support correspondingly extending the concept of censorship and accommodating it to new media offerings.

Project Information

Overview

Duration: 2006-2009

Involved persons

Arne Laudien

Third party

Cooperation Partner

Contact person

Christiane Matzen, M. A.
Head of Science Communication

Christiane Matzen, M. A.

Leibniz-Institut für Medienforschung │ Hans-Bredow-Institut (HBI)
Rothenbaumchaussee 36
20148 Hamburg

Tel. +49 (0)40 45 02 17 41
Fax +49 (0)40 45 02 17 77

Send Email

MAYBE YOU ARE ALSO INTERESTED IN THESE TOPICS?

Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter and receive the Institute's latest news via email.

SUBSCRIBE!