[IRP] good practice to define limits of freedom of expression
by MaxSenges | Fri, 12/04/2009 - 05:54
Hi there
As many of you know Germany has decided to limit free expression in some specific cases and installed practices and institutions that prescribe age classification and "illegal content" etc.. There is an ongoing discourse and about the categories and their scope etc.. E.g. what an "unconstitutional organization" or "racial demagoguery" is.
There is a whole ecosystem of public and semi-public institutions that deal with these definitions and whether e.g. the German Nationalist Party (NPD) is unconstitutional or not... the Federal Review Board for Media Harmful to Young Persons (Bundesprüfstelle für jugendgefährdende Medien, BPjM) creates an index (a.k.a. black-list) of content that is not to be distributed (or in some cases even confiscated). The Wikipedia article sums up the work of the BPjM quite nicely (esp. the indexing process).
Do you know about other good practices? Would it make sense to have a body like the BPjM on a global level?
Best
Max
As many of you know Germany has decided to limit free expression in some specific cases and installed practices and institutions that prescribe age classification and "illegal content" etc.. There is an ongoing discourse and about the categories and their scope etc.. E.g. what an "unconstitutional organization" or "racial demagoguery" is.
There is a whole ecosystem of public and semi-public institutions that deal with these definitions and whether e.g. the German Nationalist Party (NPD) is unconstitutional or not... the Federal Review Board for Media Harmful to Young Persons (Bundesprüfstelle für jugendgefährdende Medien, BPjM) creates an index (a.k.a. black-list) of content that is not to be distributed (or in some cases even confiscated). The Wikipedia article sums up the work of the BPjM quite nicely (esp. the indexing process).
Do you know about other good practices? Would it make sense to have a body like the BPjM on a global level?
Best
Max
