Volume 12 - Issue 71
/ November 2023
77
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.71.11.6
How to Cite:
Lebedeva, S.E., Vakku, G.V., Solovey, L.B., & Goncharov, D.K. (2023). Historical evolution of legislative regulation of the media
in the west. Amazonia Investiga, 12(71), 77-82. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.71.11.6
Historical evolution of legislative regulation of the media in the west
ЭВОЛЮЦИЯ ЗАКОНОДАТЕЛЬНОГО РЕГУЛИРОВАНИЯ СМИ НА ЗАПАДЕ
Received: September 15, 2023 Accepted: November 28, 2023
Written by:
Lebedeva Simona Ernestovna1
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0238-7531
Vakku Grigory Vladislavovich2
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7676-8962
Solovey Larisa Boleslavovna3
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7973-4696
Goncharov Dmitry Konstantinovich4
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3408-5036
Abstract
The objective of this study is to analyze the legal
regulation of the media in Western countries. The
study is based on universal scientific methods,
such as observation, deduction, analysis,
comparative and historical historical analysis of
different legislatures and the practices of their
implementation. The countries chosen for the
analysis are the so-called "old Europe" countries.
The study concludes that the legal regulation of
the media is a complex issue that must be
addressed with a holistic approach. The law is
important, but it is not enough to guarantee
freedom of expression and information
pluralism. There is also a need for effective law
enforcement and media monitoring systems.
Keywords: media, legislative regulation,
Western Europe, Media Law, censorship.
1
Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department "Journalism and Mass Communications named after M.F.
Nenashev"; Associate Professor of the Project Activity Center of Moscow Polytechnic University, Russian Federation.
2
Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department "Journalism and Mass Communications named after M.F.
Nenashev"; Associate Professor of the Project Activity Center of Moscow Polytechnic University, Russian Federation.
3
Candidate of Psychological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Project Activity Center of Moscow Polytechnic University, Russian
Federation.
4
Candidate of Sociological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Infocognitive Technologies of Moscow Polytechnic
University, Russian Federation.
78
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Introduction
Legal mass media regulation is a cardinal matter
in Western countries. The viral spread of fake
and destructive content in mass media in the
recent years has caused an utterly negative
response of audience and overwhelming distrust
to the mass media in question. The proportion of
mass media legal rights and obligations in this
respect differs significantly in the legislations of
different countries. The very need for such
regulation has been caused by the deep
understanding of the fact that clear and
accurately articulated rules in this sphere inspire
the development of social institutes protecting
both civil rights and freedom of speech and
communication. This balance of rights and
obligations is observed differently in different
countries.
In some Western states the activity of mass
media is regulated within the frame of the
universal civil code or some other legislations. In
this case, some important norms for journalism
are contained in different legal statutes and codes
such as the Law on Civil Liability, the Law on
Data Protection, the Law on Competition, the
Law on Broadcasting and many other laws.
In other countries mass media are regulated by a
special law on mass media. Such a law usually
constitutes the rules of organizing, functioning
and control of mass media. Sometimes these laws
may include the norms for the freedom of speech
and civil rights protection.
The level of mass media legal regulation varies
from country to country from very strict to a soft
and flexible grade. In general, mass media
regulation must provide a sustainable balance
between the freedom of speech and personal civil
rights protection (Nguyen et al., 2023).
The main objective of this scientific research is
the profound analysis of mass media legal
regulation in the Western countries. In particular,
the following aspects of the matter will be under
a thorough scrutiny:
− different forms of mass media legal
regulation in Western countries;
− rights and liabilities proportion in different
countries;
− relations between media and authorities.
The article is structured as follows:
In the first section of the article, the historical
analysis of mass media legal regulation emerging
and developing is presented.
In the second section, the specific ways of
different countries’ movement towards the
freedom of speech will be traced.
In the third section the current level of relations
between mass media and politicians in the old
European countries will be analyzed, alongside
with the specific national mass media regulation
legislatures features in different countries.
In the fourth section, the main principles of
modern mass media regulation and legal practice
problems will be considered.
The analysis ends that it’s not just the law itself,
which regulates the relations between mass
media and the state, between mass media and
society but, first and foremost, the system of its
proper implementation. That’s why it’s just the
independent mass media watch-dog
organizations and, subsequently, courts of all
levels that play a key role in the effective
functioning of mass media legal system.
Theoretical framework or literature review
The theoretical basis of this research is made up
of works by Anikeev B.E., Beglov S.I.,
Bykov A.Y., Pruttskov, G.V., Rassolova I.M.
and other authors. Some articles from The Law
Reviews (TLR), the world’s leading journal on
antitrust and competition law, were used. In her
work Skorik N.V emphisises that the freedom of
speech doesn’t mean permissiveness, but should
be strictly limited by law (Rubtsova, &
Devdariani, 2022). Levkina L.I. believes that a
right for information is one of the basics of
democracy and she gives a more than 400 –year
old retrospective history of how this legal formed
internationally and in the West European states
(Levkina, 2015). In her article
Nadirova G.K. analyses the efficiency and
implementative practice of the laws forbidding
mass media crossownership in the Western
countries. She pays special attention at mass
media antitrust legislation and its evolution and
underlines the hazards of over- and under-
regulation of mass media. Having studied the
specificity of interaction between the British
government and central and regional mass media
in the country (Nadirova, 2017). Gavrilina S and
Surma I. presented its typology and elicited some
instruments of the government used to control
Lebedeva, S.E., Vakku, G.V., Solovey, L.B., Goncharov, D.K. / Volume 12 - Issue 71: 77-82 / November, 2023
Volume 12 - Issue 71
/ November 2023
79
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
mass media. The authors consider that the British
government influence and use mass media as a
political instrument, even though there is no
formal censorship in the country. Using the
comparative method for analyzing Russian,
European and American mass media legislation
(Gavrilina, & Surma, 2020) Rubtsova
E.V., Devdariani N.V. stress the peculiarities in
the forms of interaction between the state
authorities and the civil society in different
countries (Rubtsova, & Devdariani, 2022). The
detail research of mass media constitutional legal
administration in Germany is given in the works
written by Privalov S.A. (Nguyen et al., 2023),
(Privalov, 2022) and also by Erofeev I.M.
(Erofeev, 2018a). Legal, (Erofeev, 2018b).) and
Areeva M.V. who investigate the mass media
legal system of FRG (Areeva, 2016). Bogach
K.O. conducts a comparative legal analysis of
the interaction models between the state and
mass media in Russia, America and Germany in
his research (Bogach, 2011).
Materials and Methods
The article in question is a high-quality research
based on such universal scientific methods as
observation, deduction, analysis, comparative
and comparative historical analysis of different
legislatures and the practices of their
implementation. The countries chosen for the
analysis is a core of the European legal system,
they are so-called ‘old Europe’ countries.
Knowing of the specificities in their mass media
legal systems evolution enables us to better
understand their national ways and stands in this
sphere.
In Western media studies, two clearly expressed
directions associated with the specifics of
historical development and found their form in
the 19th-20th centuries are distinguished:
"island" (Britain and the USA) and "European-
continental" (continental Europe). Thus, in
Australia, Spain, the Netherlands, and Norway,
as well as in the UK and the USA, there are no
separate media laws. France has many press
laws, which, however, are contained in different
codes. In Germany, on the contrary, a whole
series of federal media laws has been developed,
moreover, each of the lands has its own separate
law regulating this sphere (Wilhelm, 2008).
Results and discussion
The countries of Old Europe faced censorship
quite early and then fought for a long time for its
abolition. The path to reaching consensus
between the media and the authorities in terms of
recognizing the state's right to restrict the
dissemination of information that the authorities
considered harmful or undesirable was thorny
(Rubtsova, & Devdariani, 2022). And at the
beginning, political methods were used to
pressure freedom of speech. The first censor of
Europe was the Catholic Church: as early as the
5th century, Pope Innocent I compiled a whole
list of undesirable books for the flock. Then in
the 13th century, the emerging Universities,
which were under the strong influence of the
clergy, picked up the censorship relay. For
instance, at the University of Sorbonne in Paris,
the function of censorship was performed by the
theological faculty. In the German city of Mainz
(1486), the first censorship department was
opened, the first act of which was a ban on the
distribution of books printed in the local dialect.
The first law on preliminary censorship appeared
in Spain in 1502. Seven years later, English King
Henry VIII passed a law according to which all
printing was subject to "secular censorship"
(preliminary review by university professors)
and "spiritual censorship" (approval by the
Archbishop of Canterbury). From 1515, by the
bull of Pope Leo X, censorship for all printed
publications was introduced in all Catholic
countries.
Starting in 1517, a widespread "tightening of the
screws" began. For instance, in Germany, the
"Edict of Worms on Pre-Censorship" (1521) was
adopted, according to which Martin Luther was
declared a heretic and a criminal, and all his
books were banned from publication and
distribution (Nguyen et al., 2023). The
introduction of secular censorship, established at
the princes' congress in Speyer (1529), led to the
printing press becoming completely dependent
on local authorities. In France, a taboo was
placed on all publications of religious topics that
had not been approved by the Sorbonne (1521).
In England, after the adoption of the law (1538),
without obtaining a royal patent for printers or an
ordinance (1557), as well as a decision of the
High Royal Court, books and flyers were not
allowed for publication, and in the printing
houses of London, Oxford and Cambridge
without prior approval of the Archbishop of
Canterbury or an order of the Bishop of London.
All this sharply limited the opportunities for
engaging in publishing activities (Bykov, 2023).
The assault on press freedom continued to
escalate. In Germany, Charles V proposed new
censorship restrictions, which entailed measures
of persecution and punishment for the absence of
the printer's name and place of printing on the
printed publication, 1530. The new censorship
80
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
charter adopted at the princes' convention in
Speyer (1570) began to regulate not only the
content of printed publications but also the
printing business as a whole. Censorship became
even stricter with the rise of the Jesuits to power
(Nadirova, 2017).
In all Catholic countries, the papal inquisition
became increasingly harsh:
1545-1563 - The "Council of Trent" in Italy
approved a list of prohibited Protestant books
(Index of Trent);
1559 - The first printed index of banned books
(Index Librorum Prohibitorum) was introduced,
compiled by Pope Paul IV;
1571 - Pope Pius V established the Congregation
of Indexes, which was responsible for the regular
preparation and publication of lists of banned
publications (Bykov, 2023).
In England, by the decree of the Star Chamber on
book printing (1637), all legal books were
subject to the review of the supreme judges, and
the chief state secretaries were obliged to censor
political works. All other literature fell under the
supervision of the Archbishop of Canterbury and
the Bishop of London. Only compositions that
did not contain "anything contrary to the
Anglican Church, the state and government, as
well as good manners" were allowed to print. The
decree allowed searches and seizures, and only
persons who fully met certain requirements and
only with the permission of the spiritual authority
and members of the Supreme Commission were
allowed to engage in typographical work. At the
same time, all foreign publications were also
subject to review at customs (Pruttskov, 2002).
The approved Patent for Book Affairs in France
(1547) prohibited the printing and sale of books
directed against the Catholic religion. It obliged,
firstly, to submit all works of religious content
for preliminary inspection by the theological
faculty of the Sorbonne, and secondly, to state
the names of the author, printer, and place of the
building on each printed work. Secret print shops
were categorically prohibited. The edict of 1551
strengthened restrictions, according to it, the
death penalty threatened not only owners but also
buyers of a book if it did not have preliminary
and formal permission (Anikeev, 1999). Every
subsequent act adopted by the authorities only
complicated the life of publishers. Louis XIII
violated the established censorship rights of
universities by obliging all manuscripts to be
submitted for preliminary review to the
chancellor and the custodian of the state seal, and
the monarch assigned the duty of monitoring the
strict observance of press laws to a special
institution (Syndicat pour l'Imprimerie et la
Librairie), which was supposed to carry out
control over printing houses and bookstores
(Beglov, 2002).
As a result of such steps in Europe, power begins
to actively use economic levers of pressure on the
press through the issuance of patents and
censorship. The 17th century was also enriched
by a number of laws related to censorship
restrictions. Thus, in England, a law on
preliminary censorship (1643) and an Act on the
licensing of printing (1662) were adopted, and all
newspapers criticizing the crown were banned by
the chief censor, Roger L'Estrange (Gavrilina, &
Surma, 2020).
The tightening of censorship in the 18th-19th
centuries involved even greater pressure on the
printed word. In France, in 1723, a censorship
code was introduced, which provided for
executions for any indecent publications directed
against religion and the authority of the
government. As a result of the division of
Germany due to the 13-year war,
Friedrich Wilhelm issued a verdict on press
cases, and after the unification of many German
states into the German Confederation (1815), by
the decision of the Carlsbad Conference of
Ministers (1819), widespread censorship was
introduced for all politically-oriented messages.
The adoption and repeated extension of the "Law
against Harmful and Dangerous Aspirations of
Social Democracy" (1878-1890) in Germany led
to a sharp reduction in opposition publications
(Privalov, 2022).
Each of the European countries took its own path
towards freedom of speech. The dramatic
journey towards freedom and the legislative
framework for the media that was ultimately
formed, as well as its effectiveness, can be traced
in the case of the oldest European countries
(Rassolova, 2017).
Citizens of both Germany and the United
Kingdom have the right to freedom of expression
and freedom of information dissemination, and
censorship is prohibited by law in both countries.
However, it should be understood that freedom
cannot be unlimited, as one person's freedom
ends where another's begins. Therefore, in the
studied countries, a normative legislative
framework has been established to create
conditions for the adequate functioning of
journalism. Laws act as guarantors of the
preservation of certain rights and freedoms of
citizens and are aimed at ensuring the protection
Volume 12 - Issue 71
/ November 2023
81
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
of both society, journalists, and the state
(Erofeev, 2018a).
In the development of the existing legislative
framework in Europe that regulates the activities
of the media, historical events played a
significant role in the countries under
consideration. First and foremost, the period of
military conflict from 1939 to 1945 had a
profound impact on the current functioning of
media law. This was particularly evident in the
legislation of Germany, as after a long period
under the Nazi regime (1933-1945), during
which journalism had no rights to freedom of
expression, the Constitution adopted in 1949
enshrined the basic rights and freedoms of
citizens at the legislative level. In the United
Kingdom, freedom of speech was enshrined by
law as early as 1689, when the Bill of Rights was
adopted. After the end of the war, the country
ratified the Convention for the Protection of
Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and
also introduced new laws for the effective
functioning of the media (Rassolova, 2017).
It is important to note that the majority of laws
governing European media today were passed
before the 2000s. Since then, new laws have been
enacted mainly to regulate the internet and
television. In Germany, the main general laws
regulating the media include the Youth
Protection Act, the Cartel Act, the State Secrets
Act, and the Defamation Act. In the field of
media, we have identified the following specific
laws: the Broadcasting Act, the State Treaty on
Broadcasting and Telemedia, and the Telemedia
Act (Eng-News (n/f)). In 2020, the new State
Treaty on Media (Medienstaatsvertrag, MStV)
came into effect (Erofeev, 2018b).
In the United Kingdom, the media is subject to
the following laws: broadcasting law, defamation
law, state secrets law, and communications law.
In the country, self-regulatory mechanisms have
a stronger impact on the activities of the media
compared to Germany. However, the media also
adheres to general legislation, the foundations of
which are similar in both countries.
There is no single law on the media in the United
Kingdom and Germany. In the United Kingdom,
the media is subject to a number of general laws
of the country. In Germany, the media also
operates in accordance with the general laws of
the country, but each state in Germany has its
own media law. It is important to note that the
laws of the German states regarding the media
are largely similar, but they have some
differences. In order to harmonize these media
laws in Germany, there are special agreements
that do not allow the states to enact their own
laws if they contradict the Basic Law of the
Federal Republic of Germany to a certain extent
and significantly differ from each other. For
example, the State Treaty on Broadcasting
defines the organization of television and radio
broadcasting structures, which must guarantee
freedom of speech and pluralism of opinions to
the society, as well as exclude monopolization in
the market of information services.
It is important to understand that in a democratic
society, laws, both specific to the media sphere
and general, to which the media are subject, are
created for the benefit of progressive
development of journalism. Analysis of specific
cases and lawsuits has shown that the legal
regulation of the media in the United Kingdom
and Germany, despite some differences in the
structural organization of legislation, have a
number of similar approaches. Given that both
countries do not have a single law on the media,
they rely on similar laws (Areeva, 2016).
In both the pre-internet era and today, despite a
fairly well-developed legal framework, the
relationship between journalists and society often
moves from the media environment to the courts.
In modern European law, the regulation is based
on the principle of complexity of organizational,
administrative, social, legal, and economic
mechanisms. However, serious problems arose
with the rapid spread of internet resources that
did not fall under the status of traditional media
(Positive Technologies, 2020). When the
situation reached threatening proportions, work
began on the regulation of activities of individual
segments of the Global network. However, these
legislative acts do not represent a clear trend
towards restraint, and sometimes the actions of
European authorities appear inconsistent
(Bogach, 2011).
Conclusions
Thus, the Internet gradually becomes an integral
part of legal frames in the European countries.
The states with even most prominent democratic
institutes can’t do without a systematic work on
the mass and social media legislature
advancement to avoid chaotic distribution and
consumption of information. The analysis
undertaken has revealed that it’s not just the law
itself, which regulates the relations between mass
media and the state, between mass media and
society but, first and foremost, the system of its
proper implementation. That’s why it’s just the
82
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
independent mass media watch-dog
organizations and, subsequently, courts of all
levels that play a key role in the developing of
free and independent journalism. Actually, mass
media legal regulation in the Western countries
both makes problems and gives opportunities. On
the one hand, it’s very important to guarantee the
freedom of expression and the pluralism of
opinions, but, on the other hand, it’s
indispensable to defend national security and
protect private life and other fundamental rights
of citizens. The balance between these two
objectives is utterly fragile and requires constant
work of the government, mass media and civil
society.
Bibliographic references
Anikeev, V. E. (1999). History of the French
press. M.: MSU, pp. 40. ISBN 5-7776-0010-
7 (In Russian)
Areeva, M. V. (2016). On the issue of the legal
basis of the information policy of the Federal
Republic of Germany. Actual problems of
modern international relations, 8. URL:
https://acortar.link/6Si42B
Beglov, S.I. (2002). The Fourth Estate: The
British Model: A history of the UK press from
'newsletters' to electronic newspapers. M.:
Moscow University Publishing House, pp.
210. (In Russian)
Bogach, K. O. (2011). Comparative legal study
of the status of public bodies of control and
supervision over the activities of the media in
Russia, the USA and Germany. Bulletin of the
RUDN. Series: Legal Sciences, 1. URL:
https://acortar.link/ZNOmwQ
Bykov, A. Yu. (2023). History of foreign
journalism: a textbook for universities.
Moscow: Yurayt Publishing House, pp. 260.
(In Russian) ISBN 978-5-534-11507-9
Gavrilina, S., & Surma, I. (2020). The state and
the UK media: a form of interaction. Modern
Europe, 1, pp. 49-58. URL:
https://acortar.link/Ca7QdF
Eng-News. (n/f). Germany votes for €50 million
fines on social media. URL: https://eng-
news.ru/Germany-votes-for-50m-euro-
social-media-fines/
Erofeev, I. M. (2018a). Legal regulation of
activities mass media in Germany. Society
and law, 3(65). URL:
https://acortar.link/vNFFoD
Erofeev, I. M. (2018b). The formation of the
international political actorship of the
German media. South Russian Journal of
Social Sciences, 9(3). URL:
https://acortar.link/CYAbDK
Levkina, L. I. (2015). The right to information in
Europe. Communicologiya, 3(1), 128-136.
URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/pravo-
na-informatsiyu-v-evrope
Nadirova, J. K. (2017). Prohibition on cross-
media ownership as a means of limiting
media concentration. Scientific Dialogue, 6.
URL: https://acortar.link/wIZe0y
Nguyen, T.A., Bui, T.C., Dudareva, M., &
Bubnov, V. (2023). Correlation Between
the World’s Social Media Usage and Political
Stability in a Country. Public Organiz
Rev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-023-
00744-y
Positive Technologies (2020). The EU will block
IT companies for non-compliance with digital
laws. URL:
https://www.securitylab.ru/news/514115.php
Privalov, S. A. (2022). Constitutional and legal
regulation of freedom of mass information in
Germany: the possibility of adapting
experience. Bulletin of the SSS, 5(130). URL:
https://acortar.link/DgYyaj
Privalov, S.A. (2022). Prohibition of censorship
as a guarantee of freedom of mass media in
Russia and Germany. Bulletin of PAGS, 3.
URL: https://acortar.link/UDet1F
Pruttskov, G.V. (2002). Introduction to world
journalism. M.: MSU., pp. 19. (In Russian)
Rassolova, I.M. (2017). Information legal
relations: theoretical aspects. M.: Prospekt,
pp. 158. (In Russian)
Rubtsova, E. V., & Devdariani, N. V. (2022).
Comparative analysis of the systems of legal
regulation of mass media in the Russian
Federation, the United States of America and
the European Union. BGZH, 4(25). URL:
https://acortar.link/bkdiUu
Skorik, N. V. (2020). Constitutional regulation of
freedom of speech in the USA and Great
Britain. Domestic jurisprudence, 7(32). URL:
https://acortar.link/gfHhg4
Wilhelm, K. Yu. (2008). German media at the
end of the twentieth century. Power, 4,
101-108. URL: https://acortar.link/hBwHyl