United Kingdom Journals

---

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Journals >> Rape and the Media: Victim’s Rights to Anonymity and Effects of Technology on the Standard of Rape Coverage. | Boyle | European Journal of Law and Technology
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/other/journals/EJLT/2012/03-3/172.html
Cite as: Rape and the Media: Victim’s Rights to Anonymity and Effects of Technology on the Standard of Rape Coverage , Boyle , European Journal of Law and Technology

---

[New search] [Help]

---

Rape and the Media: Victim's Rights to Anonymity and Effects of Technology on the Standard of Rape Coverage

Helen Boyle [1]

Cite as: Boyle, H. 'Rape and the Media: Victim's Rights to Anonymity and Effects of Technology on the Standard of Rape Coverage', European Journal of Law and Technology, Vol. 3, No. 3, 2012

Introduction

The purpose of this essay is to raise issues in relation to the media coverage of rape. The Julian Assange scandal, which involved two women making accusations of rape and sexual molestation against him, recently sparked debate as to whether rape victim's rights to privacy should outweigh the press's right to freedom of expression. In doing so, the essay shall compare the approaches of the UK and the US. The arguments for and against preferencing the victim's rights to privacy shall be examined and conclusions will be drawn as to which jurisdictional approach is preferable. Another issue which will be examined is the impact of increased use of online technology on the quality of news coverage of crime, with emphasis on rape and how poor quality coverage of this particular crime has negative repercussions. The paper shall then provide suggestions for ways to reform the law which would raise standards of press coverage of rape in general.

Taking a Feminist Perspective

This paper will be written from a feminist perspective which takes as its most basic foundation, the notion that society is based along gendered constructions which organise 'identity, social participation, and the standards for judging self and others'. [2] The feminist analysis challenges the authority of the presumption which gives men dominance over women through making women 'the centre of intellectual inquiry' [Humphries, 2, 2009]. Through making women the focal point of this essay, the author hopes to raise awareness of the continuing need to protect the privacy of rape victims from release of their details in the press. It will also address the effect the rise in technology is having on the quality of press coverage of crime, in particular, the sensational coverage of rape which perpetuates rape myths.

The media's coverage of rape has been brought to public attention recently as an unexpected result of the Leveson Inquiry. Violence against women, most notably rape, is reported from a 'male perspective that perpetuates stereotypes and myths about women while ridiculing and trivializing their needs and concerns'. [3] End Violence Against Women (EVAW) submitted a report to the Leveson Inquiry which states that 'the growing evidence about the media and sexualisation as a conducive context in which violence against women flourishes makes this a critical issue for the Leveson Inquiry.' [4] The report provided shocking statistics as to the scale of violence against women and public attitudes towards it. These statistics state that one in three girls have experienced unwanted sexual touching in school, every year one million women are subjected to at least one instance of domestic violence and that 3.7 million women have been sexually assaulted at some point since the age of 16 [EVAW, p2, 2011]. The statistical evidence it produced as to public perceptions also make for disturbing reading: half of boys and 1/3 of girls believe that it is okay to force a woman to have sex or hit her. While 36% of people believe that the woman is either partially or wholly to blame for being raped if she is drunk and 26% if she is dressed 'sexily' in public. These figures demonstrate that rape, sexual assault and inter-gender violence still have a massive role to play in modern society and Susan Brownmiller explicates upon this role:

From prehistoric time to the present, I believe, rape has played a critical function. It is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear. [5]

The Importance of the Media in shaping attitudes to Rape

The Leveson Inquiry creates an opportunity to introduce reforms to the way the media handles coverage of rape. It is also a forum for discussion on the effectiveness of the Press Complaints Commission, many feminist groups have found that the PCC, which is a self regulating body for the press, has largely failed to protect their interests and have stopped relying on it [EVAW, p27, 2012].The media is vital in discussing the problematic social attitudes toward rape because of the importance of the role which the media plays in 'setting the agenda'. In Comb's book, he remarks that there can be no doubt as to the importance of the media's influence on what should be at the centre of public attention and debate. [6] In an article in the Guardian the power of the press was commented upon: 'The profoundly dysfunctional British press, over 75% controlled by three right wing men, has the bit between the teeth, setting the agenda for the nation's political discourse' [Combs, p ix, 2004]. As early as 1972, American journalist Theodore White noted that the power the media holds in setting the agenda of public attention is 'an authority which in other nations is usually reserved for tyrants, priests, parties and mandarins'[Combs, p ix, 2004]. An extension of this, Caringella argues, is that the media pulls an 'overwhelming weight with the public when it comes to common understanding about crime'. [7] Unfortunately, she notes that the understanding they promote 'tends to maintain myths and stereotypes about rape and sexual assault' [Caringella, p 280, 2009]. Karen Dill cites a study which exposed some men to scenes from the films Show Girls and 9 ½ Weeks, including a striptease and a blindfolded woman; which emphasised female degradation, availability and submission and male power, dominance and sexual gratification. [8] The men were then asked to read accounts of date rape or stranger rape. Those who were exposed to the media degradation of women were much more likely to say that in cases of date rape, she got what she wanted or that she enjoyed it [Dill, 2009]. According to Dill, this shows how men can learn lessons about women through exposure to the media, and that the degradation of women in the media results in rape myths being reinforced.

Freedom of the Press and Challenging the Rights of Rape Victims to Privacy and Anonymity

This section shall take advantage of the recent controversy involving Julian Assange which raised questions in both the US and the UK, as to whether victim anonymity should be maintained in the media. It shall look at the approaches which both countries take to balancing the freedoms of expression and privacy. It is important to remember that it is essential that the media maintains as much freedom as possible in order to complete its central function; 'the freedom to report and discuss matters of public interest'. [9] According to Barendt and Hitchens it is 'necessary for newspapers, broadcasters and other branches of the media to perform their vital role in the political and social life of a liberal society' [Barendt & Hitchens, p1, 2001]. Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights states that; 'Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.'

In The Sunday Times v United Kingdom the European Court of Human Rights emphasised the importance of Article 10 rights, in paragraph 71, as one of the 'essential foundations of a democratic society; in particular freedom of political and public debate'. [10] According to Lord Hope;

'Whilst [the press] must not overstep the bounds set... it is nevertheless incumbent on it to impart information and ideas on matters of public interest. Not only does the press have the task of imparting such information and ideas: the public also has a right to receive them. Were it otherwise, the press would be unable to play its vital role of 'public watchdog.' [The Sunday Times, para. 50, 1979]

The ECHR recognised in The Sunday Times that the courts cannot operate in a vacuum and although disputes will be settled in court there is no reason that the press should not present a valuable arena for debate and the dissemination of information to the public. The balance between a person's freedom of speech and the need for regulation of the media was examined in Jersild v Denmark. [11] A journalist conducted a televised interview with a youth group who made several racist remarks; the journalist was then prosecuted for aiding the spread of racism. The ECHR found that the punishment of a journalist for helping to disseminate information and statements made by another person would 'seriously hamper the contribution of the press to discussion of matters of public interest and should not be envisaged unless there are particularly strong reasons for doing so' [Jerslid, para. 27, 1995]. Article 8 of the ECHR states; 'Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence'. In paragraph 18, of the BBC's application to have a reporting restriction order varied or set aside, Lord Hope said that it had come to be recognised, as a result of instruments such as Art 8, that the privacy of personal information is something which merits protection in its own right; something worth protecting as an aspect of human autonomy and dignity. [12]

In the UK, victims of rape or serious sexual assault have unequivocal anonymity and protection from media intrusion under section 1 of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992. This is a statutory exception under Art 10(2) which allows for derogations on the basis of protecting the rights and freedoms of others. This means the names of victims of rape or sexual assault cannot be reported by the media. In the United States, no equivalent law exists; victims of sexual assault rely on a 'conspiracy of silence' in the media to protect their privacy according to Denno. [13] This is based on the media's recognition that rape is more 'personal, traumatic, and stigmatizing than most crimes' [Denno, p1113, 1992]. If the media decide to break this rule of silence the courts will defend their right to do so. The US Supreme Court, to date, has always protected the media's right to release the name of a victim of sexual assault under the First Amendment. In Florida Star v BJS, however, the court left open the possibility that a victim's constitutional rights to privacy could be infringed by revealing her name. [14] The facts of the case were that the defendant, Florida Star, received a police report which stated that a robbery and sexual assault had taken place, the victim was identified by her full name in the report and the paper proceeded to cover the story, including details of the victim's name. The state of Florida has protection for victims of such assaults, which prevent the media reporting their name under stat. 794.03. The Supreme Court held that imposing damages on the paper would violate their First Amendment rights to free speech, although this did not necessarily mean that punishment may never be administered. It would take a set of facts which were 'tailored to a state of interests of the highest order' to override the First Amendment however [Florida Star, Justice Marshall's judgment, Part III, 1989]. Thus, in the States the First Amendment right to free speech weighs more heavily in the courts than any rights to privacy from the media which are accorded to a victim of sexual assault.

Naomi Wolf has recently called into question the media practice of accepting a rape victim's right to privacy and anonymity. This was in relation to the allegations of sexual assault and rape against Julian Assange. She argues that the practice is a 'relic of the Victorian period where... rape was seen as 'the fate worse than death' and makes the point that when charges are brought anonymously they are less credible. [15] She questions why Assange should have to face allegations with potentially grave consequences when the women may remain unidentified. Jacqueline Friedman is critical of Wolf's motivations, arguing that her political alignment with Assange has affected her judgement on this issue and has taken part in victim blaming and perpetuating myths herself. [16] High profile rape cases tend to bring the conflict between the media's right to free speech versus the (potential) victim's right to privacy, to a head. When William Kennedy Smith was accused of rape, NBC News 'sparked a nationwide debate' when it decided to air the name of the victim, who expressed the desire that her privacy be protected, through anonymity in the press [Denno, p1116, 1992].

Michael Gartner, President of NBC News, explained the reasons behind the controversial decision in which he played an instrumental role. [17] First, he said:

'We are in the business of disseminating news, not suppressing it. Names and facts are news. They add credibility to stories and give viewers...the information they need to understand the stories'. [Gartner, p1116, 1992]

Gartner also notes that he has distaste for the idea that the legislature or judiciary should be making editorial decisions rather than the editors themselves. He points out that in no other area do those who make the news have the choice as to whether or not they should be named. It is also a 'disservice to the public' to uphold the conspiracy of silence which he alleges maintains the myth that there is shame in rape. He also argues that it is in the interests of fairness that the woman's name be disclosed, given that there was no debate as to whether William Kennedy Smith's should be, and had his character dragged through the mud, before he was convicted. It would seem that Gartner does not have the best interests of victims or the accused at heart, as the President of NBC News he obviously has an agenda to follow; one which focuses on grabbing headlines rather than doing either victim or claimant justice. He notes that fairness to the accused was a motivating factor in his decision to release Patricia Bowman's details, however the only reason that the accused suffered any 'unfairness' was because Gartner's paper decided to run a story on a man who had not yet been charged with any official crime.

Helen Benedict argues that arguments, like those put forth by Wolf and Gartner, are 'naive and ignore the sexual humiliation that victims experience. The public exposure of rape victims, she claims, is nothing short of punitive' [Meyers, p105, 1997]. Benedict argues that in assessing the victim's right to privacy, there is no identifiable public interest in revealing her name in the press and subjecting her history and character to public scrutiny. [18] Identifying the victim does nothing to aid understandings of the crime of rape, because 'this information has nothing to do with why she was raped'; people of all ages, races and 'attractiveness' can be raped [Benedict, p1143, 1992]. She adds that the media can provide valuable information about rape through examining the circumstances, explaining what rape is and why it happens, the strength or weakness of the case against the defendant and why society allows this to happen. According to Benedict, the US is 'tragically wrong' in delving into the sexual history and tastes of women before the defendant's have even been indicted [Benedict, p1141, 1992]. This was the case concerning Patricia Bowman in the William Kennedy Smith case, where far from providing a 'germane' coverage of the facts [Gartner, p1133, 1992], Benedict claims, NBC News painted an unflattering portrayal of Bowman. Benedict questions the hypocrisy behind treating the victims as suspects in cases involving sex; she argues that if a liquor store is robbed no one reports on the lifestyle choices or the past of the owner so why should they do so in sex crimes?

Helena Kennedy QC, comments that the real meaning behind statements which question the rationale of protecting women in these situations, is to reiterate the fear that women make up malicious lies about rape all the time. This is despite the fact that there is no evidence to suggest that false allegations of rape are made any more frequently than in any other crime: which is around two per cent. [19] Kennedy explains that the reason why laws to protect the victim's identity in the media were introduced in the UK was to help people come forward, as it was 'recognised that the shame of the experience had such serious implications for women'. [20] For many women public attention over what is still a source of 'degradation and humiliation' for them personally, would be 'the final straw' [Kennedy, p4, 2005]. She notes that for some communities rape is still such a source of dishonour it could affect the safety of some women and even lead to family rejection.

Nancy Ziegenmeyer volunteered to be the subject of a series about her rape and the aftermath, however after receiving media attention, she cites that the exposure was 'dehumanising' [Meyers, p105, 1997] EVAW cite an example where a national radio station released the name of a woman who was involved in a high profile rape case and lost. The woman suffered serious anxiety and turmoil over this and her stress was heightened by the fact that she lived in a rural area and did not want her community to know what had happened. For her, the consequence of media attention and her privacy being infringed was serious emotional distress on top of the 'unique costs for the victim' which a rape trial holds [Estrich, p3, 1987]. Both these experiences, of rape victims and media intrusions on their privacy, are compatible with the arguments made by Kennedy and Benedict that rape is still too misunderstood by society to leave victims with no protection against the existing stigmatism.

The UK law, which allows an exception to the media's Art 10 right to free speech, recognises that the potential for unnecessary harm to the character and emotions of the victim outweighs the benefits which denying Art 8 rights to privacy would achieve. In weighing up the arguments for and against preferencing the rights of rape victims over the rights of the media to exercise their freedom of speech, the author of this paper comes to the conclusion that the potential harm to victims is much greater than that done to the media, in denying their right to reveal potential rape victims identities. As such, the law in the UK is more conducive to rape victims coming forward to report the crimes done against them, than the US law, because the knowledge that their character will be dissembled for public consumption, thus traumatising them further, acts as a strong deterrent.

The Effect the Rise in Technology is Having on the Way Rape is Reported in the Press

The press want to sell papers. That is a well known fact. Dan Gilmor noted in the years between 2004 and 2006, 'the grass roots' media had grown well beyond his projections in 2004. [21] Massive increases in the use of 'podcasts' and blogs, as a means of delivering news has signalled the emergence of 'we the media' [Gilmor, p xii, 2006]. The ever increasing popularity of online news is likely to cause problems for the press, which may fail to keep up with the changing nature of the industry [Gilmor, p xxvi, 2006]. Gilmore claims that 'professional journalism's worst enemy could be itself' because increasingly 'corporate journalism, which dominates today, is squeezing quality to boost profits in the short term' [Gilmor, p xxvi, 2006]. Tabloids and newspapers, when reporting crime news, use a set of ill-defined news values to determine 'newsworthiness' [Meyers, p21, 1997]. Meyers has commented that as a result of this, some crimes are reported more than others. It is no unhappy coincidence however, that only five of rapes, in comparison to the 70% of all murders, are reported. She criticises news values as representing a 'framework that supports the dominant ideology while marginalising, trivialising, and constructing as deviant or dangerous any challenge to it', ergo, ordinary incidences of rape which are not available to 'sensationalism' do not merit coverage [Meyers, p23, 1997].

Brownmiller looked at the representation of women in selected newspapers in the US. Meyers noted that the news within Western, industrialised, democratic countries tend to yield more similarities than differences, so Brownmiller's findings are relevant to the UK. In Brownmiller's study she found that reporting on rape was 'more complex than simple, factual reporting' [Brownmiller, p337, 1975]. She says that the type of rape which is covered is likely to be a 'selected rape' (original emphasis), which will be 'enhanced by certain elements of glamour and aided by the use of stimulating adjectives, judiciously written in' [Brownmiller, p337, 1975]. In this way rape coverage is sexed up in order to fit the male fantasy, however, she stresses that this is in reference to tabloid coverage and that rape coverage is treated differently city to city. Greer has made similar observations about the UK press; he notes that for centuries the boundaries between what is 'kinky' and what is 'criminal' have been 'blurred in press discourse'. [22] He notes that in the 1970's when sex crime began to feature regularly as headline news, 'many newspapers were increasingly using the soft pornography of rape, and reports of other sex crimes, as a mechanism to sell news papers' [Greer, p94, 2003].One theme which Brownmiller picked up was the creation of a stereotypical victim. Despite statistics proving that the rapist chooses his victim with 'striking disregard' for conventional notions of attractiveness and that black women are more frequently the victims of rape than white, the reported victims were mostly young, white, middle class and 'attractive' [Brownmiller, p338, 1975]. What Brownmiller learnt was that there were two definite ways of a woman becoming newsworthy in the eyes of a paper like the Daily News (the worst offender): as the daughter of a politician or someone famous, or as an anonymous, innocent victim of a rape-murder or some other disaster.

An example of bad reporting of rape in the media was presented to the Leveson Inquiry by EVAW. The example used was an article with the title 'Six footballers jailed over gang rape of 12-year-old girls in midnight park orgy' [EVAW, p10, 2012]. EVAW took issue with the article because of the inappropriateness of using the term 'sex orgy' to describe 'multiple perpetrator acts of rape against two 12 year old girls' [EVAW, p11, 2012]. Within the article itself the girls are referred to as 'lolitas' which infers that they provoked the attack. The fact that one of the girls had a fake age on her Facebook account was also noted, however this had nothing to do with the trial. EVAW made particular note of the fact that young girls are vulnerable to these crimes and often the fact that they look older than they are, is used as justification by the perpetrators. Section 5 of theSexual Offences Act 2003 makes any penile penetration of a child under 13 years statutory rape, irrespective of 'agreement' or 'consent'. [23] The reason these issues are of utmost importance is that incorrect or confused information sent out by the media encourages the falsities and myths which accompany sex crimes and often lead to the victims being blamed by the media, and as an extension, by society. This is harmful for the obvious reason that it will discourage women from reporting instances of rape. [24] Perpetuating rape myths in the media is also very dangerous as it lulls women into a false sense of security about the types of women who are raped and the types of men who commit it; this leaves them particularly vulnerable [Franiuk et al, p290, 1979].

How can the PCC be reformed to better regulate the press when reporting violence against women?

Meyers argues:

'If the news is to stop contributing to the epidemic of violence against women and actually work to eradicate it, journalists must take responsibility for halting the perpetuation of myths and stereotypes that underlie patriarchal ideology and the mythology of anti-woman violence.' [Meyers, p103, 1997].

Journalists tend to fall back on readymade clichés involving sex and gender, when reporting incidences of abuse against women, instead of giving an unbiased account of the facts. According to Jones they often 'mask rape and battering in the context of 'love'; they often quote police and lawyers as authoritative sources but rarely consult battered women's advocates' [Meyers, p104, 1997]. Helen Benedict, has created a comprehensive list of reforms, that if undertaken might help to secure accurate and fair coverage of violence against women. The reforms include: avoidance of vocabulary suggesting the woman deserved or enjoyed the assault, obtaining balance so that if the victim's sex life is mentioned so might the suspects, including a context which might allow people to protect themselves, showing consideration of the families and victims and developing training for reporters and editors so that they learn to recognise the myths and stereotypes in their own reporting [Meyers, p, 1997].

In EVAW's submission they list reforms which might generally be used to aid the press in raising the standard and quality of their coverage of rape. In raising the standards and reporting the realities of rape in a non-sensational and undistorted manner they will help change public perceptions and attitudes to these crimes. The reforms suggested include mandatory training for journalists, covering the law on rape in the UK, which is the Sexual Offences Act 2003, and most notably, the right to anonymity in the press. Training should also cover the nature, extent and causes of rape, with emphasis on the myths surrounding the subject. There should also be clear sanctions for journalists who break the law on reporting rape, in order to provide a strong deterrent effect. While editors should increase their willingness to pull pieces which take part in victim blaming and perpetuating myths. Finally EVAW call for a regulatory body which has the teeth to address the issues which have been raised.

Conclusion

The purpose of this essay has been to highlight the importance which the media plays in today's society in shaping the opinions of the public and in 'setting the agenda' [Combs, introduction, 2004]. This influence becomes all the more important when applied to rape because this remains a subject surrounded by myths and lies which are responsible for shifting the blame for the crime, away from the man and on to the victim [RCC, p5-7, 1984]. One way in which this is done, is through the media attempting to treat the woman in the same way as the defendant [Benedict, p1144, 1992] by dissecting her personality and private life in an attempt to see if she is meritorious of protection of the law [Rape Crisis Centre, p5, 1984] or if she is simply a 'malicious liar' [Kennedy, p4, 2005]. The arguments used in the US to justify the publishing of the woman's name, and denying her rights to privacy, are ill-thought out and grounded in the belief that rape is just sex [Benedict, p1144, 1992]. The argument that treating the victims of rape in the same way as the victims of any other crime by publishing their name will desensitise the issue is a specious one because 'rape is not simply the same as being attacked by a mugger' [Benedict, p1144, 1992]. Benedict argues:

'Rape is best characterised as torture which uses sex as a weapon. Like a torturer, the rapist uses sexual acts to dominate, humiliate, and terrorise the victim. To deny the role of sexual humiliation in rape is to deny victims the horror of what they have been through.' [Benedict, p1144, 1992].

Until rape coverage is reformed as a whole, it remains imperative that victim's in the UK retain their anonymity rights under the 1992 Act, which grants them an exception to Art 10 ECHR, in order to avoid the further humiliation of victims. The media must also look to provide a more accurate and factual coverage of rape, thus raising the quality of its reports and simultaneously exposing the myths and the lies which surround the subject [Benedict, p1145, 1992]. If this can be done opinions in wider society might begin to change in a way which means people are not blinded by myths and this will encourage more rape victims to come forward if they know that they will not be blamed for what was done to them. In this way we will gain a more accurate knowledge of the extent of the crime whilst alleviating some of the suffering and trauma that victims experience.

Bibliography

Books

Barendt, E. And Hitchens, L. Media Law: Cases and Materials Pearson Education Limited, Essex.

Brownmiller S. [1975] Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape The Random House Publishing Group, New York.

Caringella S. [2009] Addressing Rape Reform in Law and Practice Columbia University Press, New York.

Combs M. [2004] Setting the Agenda Polity Press, Cambridge.

Dill K. [2009] How Fantasy Becomes Reality: Seeing through Media Influence OUP, Oxford.

Gilmor, D. [2006] We the Media: Grassroots Journalism by the people, for the People O'Reilly Media Inc., Sebastopol.

Greer, C. [2003] Sex Crime and the Media: Sex offending and the Press in a Divided Society Willan Publishing, Devon.

Humphries D. (Ed.) [2009] Women, Violence and the Media Northeastern University Press, New England.

Kennedy, H. [2005] Women and British Justice: Eve was Framed Vintage, London.

London Rape Crisis Centre, (1984) Sexual Violence: The Reality for Women The Women's Press Limited, London.

Meyers M. [1997] News Coverage of Violence Against Women Sage Publications, London.

Stevenson, K. et al. [2004] Blackstone's Guide to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 OUP, Oxford.

Journals

Benedict, H. 'Panel Discussion Symposium: The Privacy Rights of Rape Victims in the Media and Law' (1992) 61 Fordham L. Rev. 1141.

Denno, D. 'The Privacy Rights of Rape Victims in Media and the Law: Perspectives on Disclosing Rape Victim's Names' (1992)61 Fordham L. Rev. 1113.

Franiuk, R et al 'Prevalence and Effects of Rape Myths in Print Journalism: The Kobe Bryant Case' 14 Violence Against Women, 287-309.

Gartner, M. 'The Privacy Rights of Rape Victims in Media and the Law: Perspectives on Disclosing Rape Victim's Names' (1992)61 Fordham L. Rev. 1133.

Websites

Beckett C. (17 July 2011) 'Phone Hacking and Press Reforms: Journalism Needs a New Sense of Ethics but Politicians Should not be Allowed to Move the Goalposts' blog entry <http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/37966/> accessed 4 January 2012.

Chandrasekhar I., Wardrop M and Trotman A. 'Phone hacking: Timeline of the Scandal' (10 November 2012) Online news article < http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/phone-hacking/8634176/Phone-hacking-timeline-of-a-scandal.html > accessed 4 January 2012.

Chesterman, S. (17 February 2011) 'Phone-hacking, Muck-Raking and the Future of Surveillance' blog entry, < http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1768407> accessed 4 January 2012.

EVAW (December 2011) 'End Violence Against Women Submission to The Leveson Inquiry', EVAW home page < http://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/> (First entry under 'Latest News') accessed 9 January 2012.

Wintour P, (8 July 2011) 'David Cameron Defends Decision to Hire Andy Coulson', online news article < http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jul/08/david-cameron-decision-andy-coulson > accessed 4 January 2012.

Wolf, N. 'Why is Rape Different?' (December 2012) blog entry< http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/wolf31/English> accessed 12 January 2012.

―― 'Leveson Inquiry: Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press', Leveson Inquiry information page < http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/> accessed 4 January 2012.

-- 'Assange, Foucault and (Feminist) Rape Discourse' (14 January 2011) blog entry< http://thedisorderofthings.com/2011/01/14/intimate-dissidence-assange-foucault-and-feminist-rape-discourse/ > accessed 12 January 2012.

Cases

Attorney-General's Reference No. 3 of 1999: Application by the British Broadcasting corporation to set aside or vary a Reporting Restriction Order [2009] UKHL 34

Florida Star v BJS (1989) 491 U.S. 524.

Jerslid v Denmark (1995) 19 EHRR 1.

The Sunday Times v United Kingdom (1979) 2 EHRR 245.