Mass media regulation

{{Globalize|section|United States|date=February 2022}}

The transmission of content and intellectual property have attracted attention and regulation from authorities worldwide, due to the memetic nature and possible social impact of content sharing. The regulation of content may take the form of selective censorship of works and content most often featuring obscenity, violence, or dissent, with wide variation through time and geographical situation concerning the bounds of legal content transmission. Content regulation also concerns the rules regarding transmission of the content itself. Regulations on content vary, and may come into conflict with each other more often in the context of global information exchange via the Internet.

Restrictions that vary between jurisdictions exist that focus on ceasing the broadcasting of specific forms of content. This may include content that has a specific moral standard or "non-mainstream" viewpoints. About 48 countries have taken legislative or administrative steps to regulate technology companies and the content that goes along with them. The regulations work to temperate the societal issues that occur online, such as harassment and extremism, to protect people from fraudulent activity and exploitative business practices (such as scams) and protect human rights.{{Cite journal|title=Freedom on the net|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2210-7975_hrd-1234-2014001|doi=10.1163/2210-7975_hrd-1234-2014001|access-date=2021-11-15|website=Human Rights Documents online}}

A decrease in freedom of expression and anonymity on the Internet has been denounced in recent years, as governments and corporations have expanded efforts to track, monitor, flag, and sell information regarding Internet activity of users through systems such as HTTP cookies and social media analytics. Some{{Which|date=February 2022}} of the laws regarding content admissibility are designed to suppress content that is relative to the government and harmful content towards users. The use of artificial intelligence (AI) technology and algorithms is in use to flag and remove inappropriate content, with possible abuses and algorithmic bias. Over the years, content regulation has been put in place to protect and promote human rights and digital rights, such as the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation which sets limits on the information collected by Internet giants and corporations for sale and use in analytics.

• Balance between positive and negative defined liberties.

:The negative defined liberties, legislating the role of media institutions in society and securing their freedom of expression, publication, private ownership, commerce, and enterprise, must be balanced by legislation ensuring the positive freedom of citizens of their access to information.

• Balance between state and market.

:Media is at a position between the commerce and democracy.

These require the balance between rights and obligations. To maintain the contractual balance, society expects the media to take their privilege responsibly. Besides, market forces failed to guarantee the wide range of public opinions and free expression. Intend to the expectation and ensurance, regulation over the media formalized.{{cite journal|last1=Sjøvaag|first1=H.|title=The Principles of Regulation and the Assumption of Media Effects |journal=Journal of Media Business Studies|date=2014|volume=11 |pages=5–20|doi=10.1080/16522354.2014.11073573 |s2cid=167513598 }}

{{further|Mediatization_(media)#Influence_of_market_forces|topic=public service media as correction to market failure|label1=Mediatization}}

Commercial mass media controlled by economic market forces are not always delivering a product that satisfies all needs. Children and minority interests are not always serviced well. Political news are often trivialized and reduced to tabloid journalism, slogans, sound bites, spin, horse race reporting, celebrity scandals, populism, and infotainment.{{cite book |last1=Fuller |first1=Jack |title=What is happening to news: The information explosion and the crisis in journalism |date=2010 |publisher=University of Chicago Press}}

This is regarded as a problem for the democratic process when the commercial news media fail to provide balanced and thorough coverage of political issues and debates.{{cite book |last1=MacChesney |first1=Robert W |title=Rich media, poor democracy: Communication politics in dubious times |date=1999 |publisher=University of Illinois Press}}{{cite journal |last1=Barnett |first1=Steven |title=Will a crisis in journalism provoke a crisis in democracy? |journal=The Political Quarterly |date=2002 |volume=73 |issue=4 |pages=400–408|doi=10.1111/1467-923X.00494 }}{{cite journal |last1=Bucy |first1=Erik P. |last2=D'Angelo |first2=Paul |title=The Crisis of Political Communication: Normative Critiques of News and Democratic Processes |journal=Communication Yearbook |date=1999 |volume=22 |pages=301–339}}{{cite book |last1=Esser |first1=Frank |editor1-last=Kriesi |editor1-first=Hanspeter |editor2-last=Esser |editor2-first=Frank |editor3-last=Bühlmann |editor3-first=Marc |title=Democracy in the Age of Globalization and Mediatization |date=2013 |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |pages=155–176 |chapter=Mediatization as a Challenge: Media Logic versus Political Logic}}

Many countries in Europe and Japan have implemented publicly funded media with public service obligations in order to meet the needs that are not satisfied by free commercial media.{{cite book |last1=Donders |first1=K. |title=Public Service Media and Policy in Europe |date=2011 |publisher=Springer}}{{cite book |last1=Barwise |first1=Patrick |last2=Picard |first2=Robert G. |editor1-last=Picard |editor1-first=Robert G. |editor2-last=Wildman |editor2-first=Steven S. |title=Handbook on the Economics of the Media |date=2015 |publisher=Edward Elgar |pages=165–187 |chapter=The economics of television: excludability, rivalry, and imperfect competition}}{{cite book |last1=Gunther |first1=Richard |last2=Mugham |first2=Anthony |editor1-last=Gunther |editor1-first=Richard |editor2-last=Mugham |editor2-first=Anthony |title=Democracy and the Media: A Comparative Perspective |date=2000 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |pages=402–448 |chapter=The Political Impact of the Media: A Reassessment}}

However, the public service media are under increasing pressure due to competition from commercial media,{{cite journal |last1=Hjarvard |first1=Stig |last2=Kammer |first2=Aske |title=Online news: between private enterprise and public subsidy |journal=Media, Culture & Society |date=2015 |volume=37 |issue=1 |pages=115–123|doi=10.1177/0163443714553562 |s2cid=154934034 }}

as well as political pressure.{{cite book |last1=Powers |first1=Matthew |editor1-last=Freedman |editor1-first=Des |editor2-last=Goblot |editor2-first=Vana |title=A Future for Public Service Television |date=2018 |publisher=MIT Press |pages=88–96 |chapter=Pressures on public service media: Insights from a comparative analysis of twelve democracies}}

Other countries, including the US, have weak or non-existing public service media.{{cite book |last1=Pickard |first1=Victor |editor1-last=Bennett |editor1-first=W. Lance |editor2-last=Livingston |editor2-first=Steven |title=The Disinformation Age: Politics, Technology, and Disruptive Communication in the United States |date=2020 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |pages=238–258 |chapter=The Public Media Option: Confronting Policy Failure in an Age of Misinformation}}

Egypt's regulation laws encompass media and journalism publishing. Any form of press release to the public that goes against the Egyptian Constitution can be subject to punishment by these laws.{{cite web |last1=EL-SADANY |first1=MAI |title=The Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy |url=https://timep.org/commentary/analysis/egypts-new-media-regulations-legislating-state-control-over-information/}} This law was put in place to regulate the circulation of misinformation online. Legal action can be taken on those who share false facts.{{cite web |last1=Cairo |first1=Bureau |title=Ruters |website=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-egypt-politics/egypt-targets-social-media-with-new-law-idUSKBN1K722C|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180717172854/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-egypt-politics/egypt-targets-social-media-with-new-law-idUSKBN1K722C|url-status=live|archive-date=2018-07-17}} Egypt's Supreme Council for Media Regulations (SCMR) will be authorised to place people with more than 5,000 followers on social media or with a personal blog or website under supervision. More than 500 websites have already been blocked in Egypt prior to the new law in 2018. Websites must go through Egypt's “Supreme Council for the Administration of the Media” to acquire a license to publish a website.{{cite web |last1=Cairo |first1=Bureau |title=Ruters |website=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-egypt-politics/egypt-targets-social-media-with-new-law-idUSKBN1K722C|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180717172854/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-egypt-politics/egypt-targets-social-media-with-new-law-idUSKBN1K722C|url-status=live|archive-date=2018-07-17}}

Media regulation in Egypt has always been limited, but as in recent years, it has become even more limited. In 2018, a law was put in place to prevent the press and any media outlet from putting out content that violates the Egyptian Constitution, and/or contain any “violence, racism, hatred, or extremism.” If any content causes national security concerns or is broadcast as ‘false news’, the Egyptian Government will put a ban on those media outlets that produced that media. The law known as ‘The SCMR Law’, creates a media regulatory restriction plan that allows the government authorities to be able to block the content and those who want to be able to produce content, or be able to publish a website, have to obtain a license. In order to do that, those would need to go to Egypt's “Supreme Council for the Administration of the Media.”

{{POV section|date=October 2018}}

At the early period of the modern history of China, the relationship between government and society was extremely unbalanced. Government held power over the Chinese people and controlled the media, making the media highly political.

The economic reform decreased the governing function of media and created a tendency for mass media to stand for the society but not only authority. The previous unbalanced structure between powered government and weak society was loosed by the policy in some level, but not truly changed until the emergence of Internet. At first the regulator did not regard Internet as a category of mass media but a technique of business. Underestimating the power of the internet as a communications tool resulted in a lack of internet regulation. Since then, the internet has changed communication methods, media structure and overthrown the pattern of public voice expression in China.

Regulators have not and would not let the Internet out of control. In recent years, the strategy when approaching the Internet has been to regulate while developing.{{Citation needed|reason=This is more opinion than fact.|date=October 2018}}

The internet regulation in China generally formed by:

• Legislation

:China is the one who owns the greatest amount of legislation in the world. According to statistics, up to October 2008, 14 different departments such as the NPC of China, the Publicity Department of the Chinese Communist Party, and the State Council Information Office, had been published more than 60 laws related to internet regulation.{{cite book|last1=李|first1=永刚|title=我们的防火墙|date=2009|publisher=桂林：广西师范大学出版社|page=75}}

• Administration

:Internet regulation departments in China have respective distribution of work. Ministry of Industry and Information Technology is responsible for the development and regulation of the industry, Ministry of Public Security regulates security and fights crimes, and the Propaganda Department leads the system where departments of culture, broadcasting, journalism, education, etc. regulates the information contents.{{cite journal|last1=温|first1=云超|title="我们的意志是乐观的"：中国另类传播的生机就在夹杀中|journal=新闻学研究|date= April 2009|pages=261–264}}

• Technical control

:The Internet regulation departments restrain the wrongful expression and behaviors by techniques such like blocking information negative to social stable and carrying out real name system through Internet.

• Agenda control

:It requires communicators to set up the relationship between expected information targets and the real targets, guide the direction of information to reach the expectation.

• Structure adjustment

:Traditional media affiliated into government strives to develop Internet with relatively flexible administrating system to increase the communicating power of mainstream media of authority to compete with social communication.

• Training

:Regulator delivers the expectation of Internet environment to the population through training and educating to intense people’s conscious about behavior norms.

Most EU member states have replaced media ownership regulations with competition laws. These laws are created by governing bodies to protect consumers from predatory business practices by ensuring that fair competition exists in an open-market economy. However, these laws cannot solve the problem of convergence and concentration of media.{{cite journal|last1=Harcourt|first1=Alison|last2=Picard|first2=Robert|title=Policy, Economic, and Business Challenges of Media Ownership Regulation |issue=3|pages=1–17|url=https://www.academia.edu/3632449|journal=Journal of Media Business Studies|volume=6|publisher=Jönköping International Business School|access-date=26 April 2015|doi=10.1080/16522354.2009.11073486|year=2009|s2cid=167929232 }}

The Digital Services Function (DSA) governs the responsibilities of digital services that act as mediators between customers and goods, services, and content. This comprises, for example, internet marketplaces.

To reduce hate crime and speech, the 2008 Framework Decision deemed that it is illegal to encourage and spread any form of hatred based on a person's race, nationality, ethnicity, and religion.{{Cite web |title=Combating Hate Speech and Hate Crime |url=https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/combatting-discrimination/racism-and-xenophobia/combating-hate-speech-and-hate-crime_en }} In addition, a Voluntary Code of Conduct was passed in 2016 to counter hate speech online.

European countries could also request a removal of content in other countries so long as they deemed it as a form of "terrorist" content{{Cite web |title=European Parliament confirms new online censorship powers |url=https://edri.org/our-work/european-parliament-confirms-new-online-censorship-powers/ |access-date=2022-08-18 |website=European Digital Rights (EDRi) |language=en-US}}

To control personal data of European citizens, the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was passed on May 25, 2018{{Cite web |date=2018-11-07 |title=What is GDPR, the EU's new data protection law? |url=https://gdpr.eu/what-is-gdpr/ |access-date=2022-08-18 |website=GDPR.eu |language=en-US}}

On April 23, 2022, the European Parliament and Council established a political agreement on the new rules. {{Cite web |title=Press corner |url=https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/home/en |access-date=2022-05-31 |website=European Commission - European Commission |language=en}}

The media systems in Scandinavian countries are twin-duopolistic with powerful public service broadcasting and periodic strong government intervention. Hallin and Mancini introduced the Norwegian media system as Democratic Corporatist.{{cite book|last1=Hallin|first1=D.|last2=Mancini|first2=P.|title=Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics|date=2004|publisher=Cambridgeshire: Cambridge University Press.}} Newspapers started early and developed very well without state regulation until the 1960s. The rise of the advertising industry helped the most powerful newspapers grow increasingly, while the little publications were struggling at the bottom of the market. Because of the lack of diversity in the newspaper industry, the Norwegian Government took action, affecting the true freedom of speech. In 1969, Norwegian government started to provide press subsidies to small local newspapers.{{cite web |url= http://medienorge.uib.no/english/?cat=statistikk&medium=avis&queryID=193 |title=Medienorge |publisher=MiediaNorway |access-date=April 5, 2015}} But this method was not able to solve the problem completely. In 1997, compelled by the concern of the media ownership concentration, Norwegian legislators passed the Media Ownership Act entrusting the Norwegian Media Authority the power to interfere the media cases when the press freedom and media plurality was threatened. The Act was amended in 2005 and 2006 and revised in 2013.

The basic foundation of Norwegian regulation of the media sector is to ensure freedom of speech, structural pluralism, national language and culture and the protection of children from harmful media content.{{cite journal|last1=Syvertsen|first1=T.|title=Eierskapstilsynet – en studie av medieregulering i praksis [Ownership oversight: A study of media regulation in practice]|date=2004}}{{cite journal|last1=Krumsvik|first1=Arne|title=Medienes privilegier – en innføring i mediepolitikk [Media Privileges: An Introduction to Media Politics]|date=2011}} Relative regulatory incentives includes the Media Ownership Law, the Broadcasting Act, and the Editorial Independence Act. NOU 1988:36 stated that a fundamental premise of all Norwegian media regulation is that news media serves as an oppositional force to power. The condition for news media to achieve this role is the peaceful environment of diversity of editorial ownership and free speech. White Paper No.57 claimed that real content diversity can only be attained by a pluralistically owned and independent editorial media whose production is founded on the principles of journalistic professionalism. To ensure this diversity, Norwegian government regulates the framework conditions of the media and primarily focuses the regulation on pluralistic ownership.

Following the Leveson Inquiry the Press Recognition Panel (PRP) was set up under the Royal Charter on self-regulation of the press to judge whether press regulators meet the criteria recommended by the Leveson Inquiry for recognition under the Charter. By 2016 the UK had two new press regulatory bodies: the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO), which regulates most national newspapers and many other media outlets; and IMPRESS, which regulates a much smaller number of outlets but is the only press regulator recognised by the PRP (since October 2016).{{cite magazine|title=Panel Gives Alternative Press Regulator Royal Charter|url=http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/press-recognition-panel-gives-alternative-press-regulator-impress-royal-charter-backing/|magazine=Press Gazette|date=25 October 2016}} Ofcom also oversees the use of social media and devices in the United Kingdom. BBC reports that Ofcom analyzes media use of the youth (ages 3 to 15 years old) to gather information of how the United Kingdom utilizes their media.{{cite news |title=Facebook's popularity dips with UK children, says Ofcom |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-47028994|date=29 January 2019|access-date=24 January 2022}}

Broadcast media (TV, radio, video on demand), telecommunications, and postal services are regulated by Ofcom.{{Cite web|url=https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/what-is-ofcom|title=What is Ofcom?|publisher=Ofcom|language=en|access-date=19 January 2018}}

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution forbids the government from abridging freedom of speech or freedom of the press. However, there are certain exceptions to free speech. For example, there are regulations on public broadcasters: the Federal Communications Commission forbids the broadcast of "indecent" material on the public airwaves. The accidental exposure of Janet Jackson's nipple during the halftime show at Super Bowl XXXVIII led to the passage of the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005 which increased the maximum fine that the FCC could level for indecent broadcasts from $32,500 to $325,000—with a maximum liability of $3 million. This is to shield younger individuals from expressions and ideas that are deemed offensive. The Supreme Court of the United States has yet to touch the internet, but that could change if net neutrality comes into play.{{cite book|last1=Biagi|first1=Shirley|title=Media/Impact: An Introduction to Mass Media|publisher=Cengage Learning|page=319}}

File:Seal of the Federal Communications Commission.svgIn 1934, the Communications Act worked to create the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the United States. The FCC is a federal agency that works to regulate interstate and foreign communications. They are given the power to make legal decisions and judgments about regulation content under the Communications Satellite Act of 1962, including the regulation of cable television operation, telegraph, telephone, two-way radio and radio operators, satellite communication and the internet. The FCC helps to maintain many areas regarding regulation which includes fair competition, media responsibility, public safety, and homeland security.{{Cite journal|last=Guillen|first=Matthew|date=2001|title=Media Type and Content Regulation|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/rfea.088.0101|journal=Revue Française d'Études Américaines|volume=88|issue=2|pages=101|doi=10.3917/rfea.088.0101|issn=0397-7870}}

Content on the Internet is also monitored in the United States by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies such as the CIA using the provisions of the Patriot Act among other acts of legislation, to profile interactions between users and content, and to restrict the production and dissemination of dissenting content such as whistleblowing information.

Brazil’s constitution, written in 1988, guarantees freedom of expression without censorship. It also protects privacy of communications unless by court order.{{Cite web|last=Rosenn|first=Kieth|date=26 August 2021|title=Brazil's Constitution of 1988 with Amendments through 2014|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Brazil_2014.pdf|access-date=29 October 2021|website=constitutionproject.org}} Journalists in Brazil are protected under the constitution and are able to report freely{{Cite web|title=Media Systems in South America {{!}} Brazil and Venezuela|url=https://sites.psu.edu/culturecrewsouthamerica/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141014212401/http://sites.psu.edu/culturecrewsouthamerica/|url-status=dead|archive-date=October 14, 2014|access-date=2021-10-29|website=sites.psu.edu}} Many media outlets in Brazil are owned or invested in by its politicians that have an influence on their editorial decisions.{{Cite web|title=Press Freedom in Brazil: Mixing Media and Politics|url=https://www.cjfe.org/press_freedom_in_brazil_mixing_media_and_politics|access-date=2021-10-29|website=CJFE {{!}} Canadian Journalists for Free Expression}} Much of Brazil’s media regulations change with their change in government, the current government has had very little expansion of laws regarding media regulation past freedom of speech guaranteed in their constitution.

In 2021, President Jair Bolsonaro signed a decree setting out an intention to curb arbitrary removal of social media accounts through new legislation.{{Cite news|date=2021-09-06|title=Brazil President Jair Bolsonaro signs decree changing social media regulations|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/brazil-president-jair-bolsonaro-signs-decree-changing-social-media-regulations-2021-09-06/|access-date=2021-10-29}}{{Cite news |date=2021-09-06 |title=Bolsonaro: New bill will limit tech giants' power to remove content |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-58470093 |access-date=2024-10-10 |work=BBC News |language=en-GB}} Judges in Brazil have also ordered blocks on a number of social media and social networking platforms including Telegram,{{Cite web |last=Roth |first=Emma |date=2022-03-20 |title=Telegram’s ban in Brazil has been lifted |url=https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/20/22988183/telegrams-ban-brazil-lifted-president-bolsonaro |access-date=2024-10-10 |website=The Verge |language=en}} WhatsApp,{{Cite news |date=2016-07-19 |title=WhatsApp officially un-banned in Brazil after third block in eight months |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/19/whatsapp-ban-brazil-facebook |access-date=2024-10-10 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}} and Twitter.

In June 2010, the Fijian Government passed the Media Industry Development Decree of 2010 establishing the Media Industry Development Authority of Fiji which enforces media ethics governing all media organizations in Fiji. The Authority has implemented penalties which includes fines and imprisonment in case of any ethical breaches.{{Cite web |title=Review media Act, says FMA |url=https://www.fijitimes.com/review-media-act-says-fma/ |access-date=2022-10-11 |website=FijiTimes |language=en}} The aim of the decree is to promote a balance, fair and accurate reporting in Fiji.{{Cite web |last=Fijivillage |title=AG hopes the judiciary picks up on the development of the laws surrounding social media |url=https://www.fijivillage.com/feature/AG-hopes-the-judiciary-picks-up-on-the-development-of-the-laws-surrounding-social-media-4xf58r/ |access-date=2022-10-11 |website=www.fijivillage.com |language=en}}

Indonesian Ministerial Regulation #5 (MR5) grants the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology the authority to compel any individual, business entity or community that operates "electronic systems" (ESOs) to restrict or remove any content deemed to be in violation of Indonesia's laws within 24 hours. The breadth and open-ended nature of the regulation, implemented by the ministry in November 2020, can lead to censorship.{{Cite web |last1=P |first1=Jyoti |last2=ay |date=2021-03-18 |title=Regulation of Digital Platforms in Asia |url=https://www.internetgovernance.org/2021/03/18/regulation-of-digital-platforms-in-asia/ |access-date=2022-05-31 |website=Internet Governance Project |language=en-US}}

The Myanmar government drafted a law in February 2021 that would empower authorities to "order internet shutdowns, disrupt or block online services, ban service providers, intercept user accounts, access personal data of users and force the removal of any content on demand." The "cybersecurity law" was drafted after a military coup ousted Aung San Suu Kyi.

Lowstedt and Al-Wahid suggested that the authority need to issue diverse media laws centering at anti-monopoly and anti-oligopoly with democratic legitimacy since media outlets are important for national security and social stability. The global regulation of new media technologies is to ensure the cultural diversity in media content, and provide a free space of public access and various opinions and ideas without censorship. Also, the regulation protects the independence of media ownership from dominance of powerful financial corporations, and preserves the media from commercial and political hegemony.{{cite journal|last1=Löwstedt|first1=Anthony|last2=Al-Wahid|first2=Sulaiman|title=Cultural diversity and the global regulation of new media technologies|journal=International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics|date=2013|volume=9|issue=2|pages=195–200|doi=10.1386/macp.9.2.195_3}}

In China, the possibility that a film approved by Central Board of Film Censors can be banned due to the disagreement of a specific leading cadre has never been eliminated. The Chinese screenwriter Wang Xingdong stated that regulation over literature and art should be based on laws and not the preference of some individuals. In the field of media, relative legislation must be introduced as soon as possible and applied strictly to avoid the case that some leaders overwhelm the law with their power to control the media content.{{cite news|title=王兴东建议：加快立法根治电影审查"以言代法"|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/2015-03/02/c_1114484352.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150927190356/http://news.xinhuanet.com/2015-03/02/c_1114484352.htm|url-status=dead|archive-date=September 27, 2015|publisher=新华网|date=2 March 2015}}

• {{annotated link|Censorship}}
• {{annotated link|Communications law}}
• {{annotated link|Federal Communications Commission}}
• {{annotated link|Freedom of the press}}
• {{annotated link|Leveson Inquiry}}
• {{annotated link|Media policy}}
• {{annotated link|Media law}}
• {{annotated link|Media manipulation}}
• {{annotated link|News media}}
• {{annotated link|Royal Charter on self-regulation of the press}} (UK)
• {{annotated link|Unlicensed broadcasting}}
• {{annotated link|Net Neutrality}}

{{Reflist}}

{{World topic|prefix=Mass media regulation in|title=Mass media regulation by country|noredlinks=yes}}

{{Censorship}}

{{Media manipulation}}

{{ course assignment | course = Education Program:University of Toronto Mississauga/CCT110: The Rhetoric of Digital and Interactive Media Environments (S2014) | term = 2014 Q1 }}

Category:Politics and technology