Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T02:58:50.296Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Debating Abortion—The Right to Offend Gratuitously

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 November 2003

Ivan Hare
Get access

Extract

In R. (Pro-Life Alliance) v. British Broadcasting Corporation [2003] UKHL 23, [2003] 2 W.L.R. 1403, the House of Lords held that the broadcaster's decision to prohibit a Party Election Broadcast by an anti-abortion group was a lawful exercise of its general duty not to transmit offensive programmes. This duty applies to all terrestrial broadcasters and exhorts them to ensure that their transmissions “do not include anything which offends against good taste or decency or is likely to be offensive to public feeling” (para. 5(1)(d) of the Agreement between the BBC and the Secretary of State for National Heritage dated 25 January 1996 and section 6(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1990).

Type
Case and Comment
Information
The Cambridge Law Journal , Volume 62 , Issue 3 , 03 November 2003 , pp. 525 - 528
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)