Codes of Practice

Media law

There are several reasons why codes of practice are required:

• to set a benchmark of what is acceptable and what is not
• to keep in touch with contacts.
• to reassure the public - it builds trust between journalists and the audience.

There are three main bodies that set and regulate these codes of practice:

• The Press Complaints Commissioner (PCC) - newspapers and magazines
• OFCOM - broadcasters
• BBC - for staff and licence payers.

A case demonstrating how important codes of practice are is that of Peter Fincham. He was a BBC one controller who resigned after an investigation into footage misrepresenting the Queen. It concerned a documentary trailer which was edited out of sequence and incorrectly, Peter Fincham told the press that the documentary showed the Queen walking out of a photo session 'in a huff'.

The codes are crucial as they guide individuals through ethical issues. Questions such as, how can you go to get the story? what practices are legitimate? and, when do circumstances make a difference? can therefore be checked and answered with a higher degree of accuracy.

The key areas that the codes are used are therefore:

• ethical behaviour
• fair treatment (privacy, crime)
• requirement for accuracy and impartiality.
• to protect vulnerable groups i.e. children.

The PCC

It is considered to be the toothless tiger in comparison with the other codes. This is due to the fact, that it is self-regulated.
On its website, http://www.pcc.org.uk/, it gives brief guidelines and information regarding their stance on the accuracy of reports, the opportunity to reply, privacy, harassment, the intrusion into grief or shock and reports involving children. Rather surprisingly and unlike other codes, it does not include any guidelines on impartiality, which infers that it is less concerned with this.

A controversial and grey area of the PCC code is that some reports are affected or even completely determined by the public interest defence and so it is unclear when exactly and to what extent the rules can be bent.

OFCOM

If the PCC is a toothless tiger, OFCOM is definitely the fierce tiger of the codes as it has clear and established statutory powers attached.
If an error is made, then either the individual or their superior will be fined.
The competition phone - in saga demonstrates this, as stars Ant and Dec, along with programmes Blue Peter and Comic Relief were all caught up in it.
ITV were fined a record amount of £5.6 million, which was reached as it was a percentage of their turnover. This amount turnt out to be a more than even the most serious libel cases.
The BBC was fined £400,000. Still a staggering amount, in so far as claims to broadcasting channels go.
OFCOM also have certain powers that they can enforce upon broadcasters.

These include;

• giving the direction not to repeat the programme.
• corrections to findings must be broadcast, by way of an apology.
• impose fines. These can be up to 5% of their overall revenue. A point of contention concerns how revenue is defined? This seems to be unclear.
• in a very severe case, they can revoke a broadcasting licence. This has never happened, although if it did, it would be more likely to happen to channels with low usage.

On OFCOM's website, it discusses much of the same things as the PCCs, but goes into a lot more depth.

Although acknowledging that the impartiality principle brought up various intellectual difficulties concerning its definition and practice, Evan Davis's case concluded that impartiality was 'probably a public good'.

Impartiality is a requirement for all broadcasters. It is not applicable to any newspaper i.e. the Sun and the Daily Mail would have great difficulty is suddenly they had to adhere to impartiality requirements.
The classic BBC definition of impartiality is that it is the absence of bias or perception and it considers the 'axis of debate'. Examples of these include climate change and economic policy.

In some instances, such as David Irvine's piece on the Holocaust, obviously there is one resounding opinion of those events. However, in terms of producing a balance, the reporter would emphasis that the 'other' view was in the minority.

BBC

The BBC is considered as a wounded teddy bear and has a three-stage complaints process (according to the website):

Stage 1: What happens first when I make a complaint?

• We aim to reply to you within 10 working days depending on the nature of your complaint. We also publish public responses to significant issues of wide audience concern on this website.
• If we have made a mistake we will apologise and take action to stop it happening again.
• If you are dissatisfied with our first response, please contact the department which replied explaining why and requesting a further response to the complaint. If you made your original complaint through this website, you will need to use our web form again. You should normally do this within 20 working days.

Stage 2: If I'm not satisfied with this second reply, what can I do next?

• If you consider that the second response you received still does not address your complaint, we will advise you how to take the matter further to this next stage. You should normally do this within 20 working days
• If it is about a specific item which you believe has breached BBC editorial standards and it was broadcast or published by the BBC, it will normally be referred to the Editorial Complaints Unit. The Unit will independently investigate your complaint (normally in writing), decide if it is justified and, if so, ensure that the BBC takes appropriate action in response.
• Other complaints at this stage will normally be referred to management in the division responsible. For full details of the BBC’s complaints processes please visit the BBC Trust website.

Stage 3: If I still think the BBC has got it wrong what can I do?

• The BBC Trust ensures complaints are properly handled by the BBC and that the complaints process reflects best practice and opportunities for learning.
• Within 20 working days of your response at Stage 2, you may ask the BBC Trust to consider an appeal against the finding. If the BBC Trust upholds an appeal it expects management to take account of its findings.
• You can write to the BBC Trust at 180 Great Portland Street, London W1W 5QZ. Full details of the complaints and appeals processes are on the BBC Trust website.

One of the most recent complaints scandals was that of Russell Brand and Jonathon Ross.
The BBC was fined £150,000 after Brand and Ross left a message on Andrew Sach's answer phone , which OFCOM described as "gratuitously offensive, humiliating and demeaning".

Have Pepsi fell for the Russian's charm?

Pepsi have paid a whopping £2.4 billion to a Russian drinks firm, a mere four hours before the World Cup decision was announced.

In a controversial, yet supposedly coincidental move, Pepsi bought a stake in the widely successful Wimm-Bill-Dann firm. It's biggest ever oversea's deal!
Many people believe that the World Cup outcome had already been decided before delegates had even entered the room, sparking discussion as to the reasoning behind Pepsi's stake hold.

The name Wimm-Bill-Dann was purposely chosen as the founders, Pavel Dudnikov and Vladimir Tambov believed it sounded very much like the tennis competition Wimbledon. Thus, suggesting it hoped to create a link with England.

The chief of Pepsi Indra Nooyi said: "This gives us clear leadership in the food and beverage industry in Russia."

Only a day in and yet already the conspiracies have begun!

Ethics and Radio

Ethical implications are attached to every piece of journalism. These include:

• the stories that are chosen and equally those that are not;
• who is interviewed;
• the questions put to the interviewee;
• the editing of those interviews;
• what time of day the story is released;
• how many bulletins are used;
• the length of clips used and;
• how the cues and headlines are written and read.

The International Journalist Code's first clause states:

'Respect for the truth and for the right of the public to the truth is the first duty of the journalist.'

This also resonates in various other codes of conduct, namely:

• The International Federation of Journalism
• The BBC
• The National Union of Journalists
• Committee of Concerned Journalists
• The Radio & Television News Directors Association
• Arabic broadcaster Al-Jazeera

The truth is not always the easiest thing to find and is highly time consuming. Although, there are other  principles present;  accuracy, fairness, public accountability, impartiality and objectivity, truth can be said to underpin them all.

The BBC guidelines state that:
'We strive to be accurate and establish the truth of what has hapened. Accuracy is more important than speed and it is often more than a question of getting the facts right. All relevant facts and information should be weighed to get at the truth. Our output will be well sourced, based on sound evidence, thoroughly tested and presented in clear; precise language. We will be honest and open about what we don't know and avoid unfounded speculation.'


The former director of the BBC News, Richard Sambrook, writing in the British Journalism Review in 2004 said how:
'In journalism, 'mainly right' is like being half pregnant - it's an unsustainable position.'

Impartiality and diversity
BBC Editorial Guidelines state how:
'We strive to be fair and open minded and reflect all significant strands of opinion by exploring the range and conflict of views. We will be objective and even handed in our approach to be a subject. We will provide professional judgements where appropriate, but we will never promote a particular view on controversial matters of public policy or political or industrial controversy.'

Here is a transcript from a piece on Radio 4's 'From Our Own Correspondent' on the funeral of the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat in 2004:

'The world watches the unfolding drama as the man who has become the symbol for Palestinian nationalism seems to hover between life and death...To be honest, the coverage of Yasser Arafat's illness and departure from Palestine was a real grind. I churned out one report after the other; without any sense of drama. Foreign journalists seemed much more excited about Mr Arafat's fate than anyone in Ramallah...Where were the people, I wondered, the mass demonstrations of solidarity, the frantic expressions of concern?...I started to cry...without warning. In quieter moments since I have asked myself, why the sudden surge of emotion?'

This led to hundreds of complaints from listeners. The BBC Governor's Programme Complaints Committee rejected the idea that this was a 'tearful eulogy' and a 'flagrant violation' of Editorial Guidelines. Also, it was said that the report was balanced with Mr Arafat's 'obvious failings'. The governor's decided that  that the reference to crying did breach the guidelines on impartiality. The BBC's Director of News  apologised for what she described as an 'editorial misjudgement' and thus that the reporter 'unintentionally gave the impression of over-identifying with Yasser Arafat and his cause.'

Common diversity issues

• ethnicity
• disability, whether physical or mental
• faith and religion
• gender and sexual orientation
• age

Ethical dilemma scenarios

The comments after each of these come from Kevin Marsh, the former Editor of BBC Radio 4's Today programme and now the Editor-in-Chief of the BBC's College of Journalism.

1. You are covering a dramatic accident and the only eyewitness is a homeless man who seems somewhat intoxicated. He provides compellling information that appears to corroborate the scene.
Do you use it?

No. Under no circumstances. A single witness corroborates nothing. A single drunk witness is potentially misleading. If you were honest - if a little blunt - about this man to the audience you would say in a script 'The only witness to the incident was this drunk tramp.' Would they conclude he was a powerful, key witness?

2. While gathering natural sound at a high school football match, your sports reporter captures the popular coach making derogatory sexual references while motivating his players. Do you run a story?

I wouldn't run the story just with that information. The tape has the status very similar to that of a recording made for note-taking purposes. That's to say, it was legitimate to make it and there is not a problem in discovering that there is a potential story in it. We would, however, have to begin the story from scratch, though with very intial evidence. We would make every effort to gather evidence  that he had made  inappropriate comments, spelling out what they were.  Where the story went next would depend on his reaction and any other corroboration we could gather. It's possible - though not without heavy - duty Editorial Policy intervention - that it gets to the point where we run the original tape, but it would have to be after considerable efforts on our part to get the story another way.

3. A major celebrity is intown campaigning hard for a parliamentary candidate and wants to give media interviews. Do you schedule one?

It depends. There is an intrinsic reason why not. You'd have to look at what else you're planning/have done in that consitiuency. Why is the celeb campaigning? Who else is campaigning? There are plenty of circumstances where this is fine, but a few where you'd risk unbalancing your coverage and you'd have to be sure you weren't doing that. At the very least this would mean usuallyequally lengthy and impactful interviews with the other candidates or cheerleaders for them not legally but out of fairness.

 

Freedom of Information part two

Records produced on issues relating to public authorities such as city councils and healthcares are paid for by the taxpayer and therefore we, as a nation, own it. The Freedom of Information Act is made for journalists, citizens, taxpayers - no one is excluded from requesting information.

There are 130,000 bodies covered by the act and there are 100,000 freedom of information requests a year, costing around £34 million to produce.

Critics have argued that the act was made purely to make journalists jobs easier, although research has found that only 12% of requests come from journalists.

The Kingsnorth Climate protest concerned the protest arguing for the prevention of a coal - powered station from being built. A report stated that the protest was very violent and that 70 police officers had been hurt. David Laws, a Liberal Democrat MP put in an FOI request and found that only 12 had been injured and only four needed medical treatment. Not as violent as previously claimed!

Andrew Marr's interview with Tony Blair, revealed how much of a big mistake during his time in office, the implementation of the FOI act was. Perhaps this is why it has been seen to have a 'chilling effect' in terms of organisations having to self-sensor themselves for fear of having to reveal information to the public at large. This has the effect of reducing the likelihood of individuals discussing things openly or freely.

Journalists claim that there is at present, a high watermark of FOI requests and that individuals are now resorting to what is known as 'sofa chat'. This is where, as opposed to expressing views or plans in letter, text or email, individuals will have an informal chat, to prevent the likelihood of an FOI request being made.

The BBC is in favour of FOI and state that the basic principle is that:

'Any person making a request for information to a public authority is entitled to have that information communicated to him.'

FOI requests are expressed in either writing or email.

Private companies such as Coca Cola cannot be contacted for FOI requests as although, we buy their products, we do not fund their existence.

Public authorities can say no if producing the records will cost more than £600 (or £450 for smaller authorities) or if the information is exempt:

• Absolute exemption - i.e. court records, security services
• Qualified exemption - i.e. ministerial communications, commercial confidentiality

Individuals must balance the public interest with the need to express information freely. This is however, not specified in law and so must be proven.

In terms of time, organisations must 'respond promptly'. They must send a response within 20 days and then they have 40 days to either produce a record of give reason(s) for why they cannot.

One qualified exemption that is very vague and considered a 'get out' is:

• That information 'intended' for future publication does not have to be published. However, what is considered a reasonable time scale is uncertain and subjective.

If they say no, then the next stages are:

• to request an internal review
•  to visit an information commissioner (six month waiting list)
• to go to an information tribunal
• to lastly visit the High court.

The FOI act is the only reason that the expenses scandal came out. The Daily Telegraph pursued the case and went right up to the High court, spending £150,000.

I and a fellow student then proceeded to send an FOI request to the Winchester and Eastleigh healthcare NHS trust.

We asked them to produce a report regarding the number, age and occupations of patients who had been prescribed anti-depressants and/or Viagra in the years 2007/2008, 2008/2009 and 2009/2010.

The challenges faced by a journalist (2)

Public Sphere

Journalism is important as it catapults discussion of information into the public sphere. This social role gives a journalist the role of reflection and practitioning news, treating it as a practiced art form, understanding that it goes beyond mere entertainment.

Brian McNair states how:

'Analysts and critics may dispute the extent to which Britain has a properly functioning 'public sphere'...but all agree that such a space should exist, and that the media are at its core.'

In the late 17th and early 18th centuries Jurgen Habermas stated how, 'the advent of a public sphere of reasoned discourses circulating in the political realm independent of both the Crown and Parliament (Allan 1997: 298).

Granville Williams argues that the concept that journalism serves an informed citizenry is undermined by the fact that that audiences are often treated as merely consumers. He believes there are constant battles between:

• Community v Globalism
• Value v Price
• Society v Market
• Regulation v Efficiency
• Need v Want
• Citizen v Community

Reflective Practitioner

Lynette Sheridan Burns (2002: 11) believes that journalists must become reflective practitioners, if they are to avoid losing the importance attached to social responsibilty:

'Professional integrity is not something you have when you are feeling a bit down at the end of a long week. It is a state of mindfulness that you bring to everything you write, no matter how humble the topic...Put simply, given the power that you have to do good or harm by virtue of the decisions you make, under pressure each day, the least you can do is think about it. It means an active commitment in journalists to scrutinise theor own actions, exposing the processes and underlying values in their work while they are doing it'.

Pat Aufderheide discusses the need to produce 'a more self - aware journalistic culture'. With regards to the US television after the 9/11 attacks, he argues  that journalists do need 'time, money and imagination to experiment with the kind of  reporting that gives viewers an understanding of large conflicts and issues in the world, before they become the stuff of catastrophe.'

The importance of maintaining curiosity

One of the main challenges in journalism is said to be the retention of curiosity.

Martin Wainwright of the Guardian states how, 'the best journalists go into a situation with an open and absorbing mind.' He continues: 'The great virtue of a journalist is curiosity - a constant interest in what makes people tick, why has this happened, what is going on?'

Jane Merrick, of the Press Association believed that modesty is an important quality to possess: 

'Never think that you know more than the lowest journalist on the newspaper or agency, or wherever you start. Take everything on board. There's a balance between giving your newsdesk  the confidence that you can do the job, and being level-headed. It's a matter of getting the balance right. Journalists will respect somebody prepared to take it all on board.'

Abul Taher feels that journalism is ' a daily ritual of moral and intellectual compromise - it is a good job, but it is hard'.

Paul Foot, a long standing reporter, investigator and columnist has some useful points for  aspiring young journalists in the 21st century:

I think people should join the NUJ and if there isn't a union where they work they should do their best to try and form one. That's the first thing. The other thing is, don't lose your sense of curiosity or your sense of scepticism. Understand the way the industry works and do your best to apply yourself against that. The last thing I mean is young people rushing in and telling their editors how to run the world, that's absolutely fatal. There's nothing worse than the arrogant young person - who knows everything - going and telling people what to do. Even if they're right, which often they are, that's not the way to behave. That's the way to get sacked. You've got to keep your head, you've got to bite your lip, and you've got to do what you're told a lot of the time. Nine times out of ten it's better to go ahead and do what you are told, but there's a tenth time when it is worth resisting. The main thing is to keep your sense of independent observation as to what's happening around you, and to try to use what ability you have to get those things into print. Whatever, you see, there's a story behind it. There is a truth and there's no doubt there are facts. Facts are facts. you cannot bend them.'

The one thing to remember then is once you have that initial foot in the door, do as your told by your editor!

Agency

Agency refers to the extent to which individual journalists can make a difference to the news. 

The political economy model has developed the idea that it is the determining role played by economic power and material factors in creating media products.

Peter Golding and Philip Elliott state how: 'News changes very little when the individuals that produce it are changed' - quoted in Curron and Seaton (1997: 277).

Stuart Hall beieves that the media have 'relative autonomy from ruling class power in the narrow sense,' but emphasises the 'relative', as he states his belief that journalism tends to reproduce societies prevailing ideology.

John O'neil believes that although agency may be limited by economic structures it does very much exist:

'Many, I suspect, find themselves forced to compromise the constitutive values of journalism,

while at the same time insisting that some of the standards be enforced...Journalists, like other workers, are not totally passive in their attitude to their own faculties.'

Harcup argues that talk on agency needs to take into account the tension of between journalists, of different identities between individual professionals, as socially responsible citizens, and as workers with a sense of a collective identity.

The challenges faced by a journalist (1)

Constraints

One of the many challenges facing journalists are the constraints that is placed upon them in terms of what they are able to publish.

Brian Whittle believes that 'the best reporter is someone who's naturally nosy.'

Common constraints also include time, style, advertisers, audience, subjectivity and sources that journalists face on a daily basis. With these in mind, David Randall came up with the suggestion that every newspaper should consider publishing this disclaimer:

'This paper, and the hundreds of thousands of words it contains, has been produced in about 15 hours by a group of fallible human beings, working out of cramped offices while trying to find out about what happened in the world from people who are sometimes reluctant to tell us and, at other times, positively obstructive. Its content has been determined by a series of subjective judgements made by reporters and executives, tempered by what they  know to be the editor's, owner's and reader's prejudices. Some stories appear here without essential context as this would make them less dramatic or coherent and some of the language employed has been deliberately chosen for its emotional impact, rather than its accuracy. Some features are printed solely to attract certain advertisers.'
What he really means is that do not believe all what you read in newspapers.
The London Evening Post in 1754, was quoted as saying 'Those who declaim against Liberties taken by Newspapers....know not what they say; it is this Liberty, that....protects all the rest.'
However, it has been argued that, although the journalists work alongside various constraints, some of these may be considered positive. For example, the Code of Conduct set out by the National Union of Journalists and the Code of practice by the Press Complaints Commission may be interpreted as protecting and helping journalists to resist what may be viewed as unethical behaviour and also defending journalistic integrity (Harcup 2002a and 2002b).
HG Wells delivered a message to his members of the NUJ in 1922 saying how:
'We affect opinion and public and private life profoundly, and we need to cherish any scrap of independence we possess and can secure. We are not mere hirelings ; our work is creative and repsponsible work. The activities of rich adventurers in buying, and directing the policy, groups of newspapers is a grave public danger. A free-spirited, well-paid, and well-organised profession of journalism is our only protection against the danger. (Quoted in Mansfield 1945: 518).

Ethical Responsibility

A further challenge for journalists is the importance of ethical responsibility. Jake Lynch, an international TV and print reporter believes that journalists must take this seriously as it is an imperative consideration of the job:

'In this information age, journalists are not disconnected observers but actual participants in the way communities and societies understand each other and the way parties wage conflict...We live in a media-savvy world. There's no way of knowing what journalists are seeing or hearing would have happened the same way - if at all - if no press was present. This means that policies are born with a media strategy built in. There's nothing pejorative in that, it's a condition of modern life; but it closes the circle of cause and effect between journalist and source. The only way anyone can possibly calculate journalists' likely response to what they do is from their experience of previous reporting. Every time facts get reported, it adds to the collective understanding of how similar facts will likely be reported in future. That understanding then informs people's behaviour. This is the feedback loop. It means every journalist bears some unknowable share of the responsibility for what happens next.'

Lindsay Eastwood has said how 'we should have been dodging bricks, but the adrenalin gets you.'

Media Law

Copyright

Week 7

The first copyright statute was the British Statute of Anne of 1709. The full title of this was "an act for the Encouragement of Learning, by vesting the Copies of Printed Books in the Authors or purchasers of such Copies, during the Times therein mentioned".
Copyright can be extended to photographs, films, sound recordings, broadcasts and computer technology (including software and databases).
It has been internalised from the late 19th century onwards and today adds both a global and European dimension to the law.
Currently copyright law is governed by the Copyright, Design and Patents Act 1988 which simplifies the different categories of works that are protected by copyright. This eliminates the treatment of engravings and photographs:

• literary, dramatic and musical works (s. 3): they must be recorded in writing or otherwise to be granted copyright, and copyright begins from when recording takes place
• artistic works (s. 4): includes buildings, photographs, engravings and works of artistic craftsmanship.
• sound recordings and films (s. 5)
• broadcasts (s. 6): a transmission by wireless telegraphy which is intended and capable of reception by members of the public.
• cable programmes (s. 7). A cable programme is a part of a service transmitting images, sound or other information to two or more different places or to members of the public by means other than wireless telegraphy. There are several exceptions however, including general Internet use.
• published editions (s. 8) refers to the published edition of the whole or part of one or more literary, dramatic or musical works.

A division also exists between the copyright treatment of 'author works', which are governed by the Berne convention and 'media works', governed by the Rome convention.
Copyright has economic functioning which enables the production emanating originally from information, ideas and entertainment to be rewarding for those authors and publishers who have produced them. Copyright also has the non-economic function of providing a legal system the ability to recognise creativity as an aspect of individual personality.

In Sweeney v Macmillan Publishers Ltd, Joyce estate, which owned copyright in Ulysses and preparatory material , claimed that a new edition of the material produced was an infringement of the author's copyright. It was held that copyright subsisted in each chapter and perhaps every page or even sentence of Ulysses, as it was an original piece. However, as each passage was to be incorporated into a larger work, copyright should be regarded as existing in the whole piece, rather than constituent parts.
In Robin Ray v Classic FM, the high court ruled that a contractor providing services owns the intellectual property in the materials created for their client.
In Coffrey v Warner/Chappell Music Ltd, Chappell wrote the music and lyrics to a song called 'Forever after'. Chappell claimed that the copyright for this song had been infringed by another song. The issue was whether these parts, that were contained in a larger piece of work  could by themselves constitute another work. It was held that, when taken in isolation, three features were not, when taken in isolation, sufficiently separable from the remainder of the song to be considered a musical work in its own right and it did not amount to a substantial part of 'forever after' as a whole.

The general principle is that copyright protects the expression of a work rather than ideas.
Lord Hoffman in Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams Ltd stated that the connection between an unpredictable idea into a copyright expression was the degree of originality, skill, labour and time depicted by the author.
Pixx Products v Winstone held that although each case should be judged on their own independent facts, it can be inferred that a higher level of generality or abstraction in terms of the idea of the work, the less likely it is to be protected as such.
In the case of Interlego AG v Tyco Industries Inc, concerned the artistic copyright claimed in engineering drawings modifying an earlier design by the same author, the Lego company. 'Nobody draws a tolerance,  nor can it be reproduced three dimensionally' - Lord Oliver. This is important as literary copyright knows no equivalent to the artistic copyright's concept of 3D infringement.

Fixation refers to the concept set out in the Berne convention which says that copyright subsists in literary and artistic works in terms of 'whatever may be made  of formed of its expression' (Art 2(1)). However, this does allow for the law 'to prescribe that works in general or any specified category of works shall not be protected unless they have been fixed in some permanent form' (Art 2(2)). So, copyright does not subsist in a literary, dramatic or musical work unless and until recorded in writing or otherwise (s.3(2)).
In Norowzian v Arks Ltd (No.2), Norowzian produced a film called 'Joy'. It showed a man dancing to music. The use of an editing technique known as 'jump cutting' made it appear that a man was making sudden changes in positions, that were not possible as successive movements in reality. Rattee J said that 'Joy, unlike some films, it is not a recording of a dramatic work , because, as a result of a drastic editing process adopted by Norowzian , it is not a recording of anything that was or could be danced or performed by anyone...'.

'Originality does not in this sense mean that the work must be an expression of originality or inventive thought. Copyright acts not with the originality of ideas, but with the expression of thought...originality which is required relates to the expression of the thought' - Peterson J.
'What is worth copying is worth protecting' - Peterson J.
 In George Hensher Ltd v Restawire Upholstery (Lanchashire Ltd), it was up to the judge to determine whether a rough prototype for a suite of furniture was a work of artistic craftsmanship. It was held that the prototype was not a work of artistic craftsmanship.
In Green v Broadcasting Corporation of New Zealand, the Privy Council had to grapple with the question of whether a few catchphrases used constantly by the host of a television show ('opportunity knocks') constituted a dramatic work. It was held that it did not amount to a dramatic work.

Effort, skill and labour

In Cramp v Smythson it was held that tables and information printed  on part of a pocket diary had no copyright because selection and appointment had not required the exercise of any judgement or taste by the complier.
In Exxon Corporation v Exxon Insurance, the claim was for a literary copyright in the single word 'exxon'. The failure concerned not being able to achieve the production of a literary work, rather than originality, but the point to be stressed is that effort, skill and labour by itself is not necessarily enough to get copyright.

Derivative works:
A new copyright is to be created concerning alterations to text which must be extensive and substantial.
In Black v Murray, it was held that the changes made in Black's second edition of material had their own copyright, but that Murray's takings were substantial and infringed copyright, but only in relation to the editorial notes.
In Walter v Lane, the House of Lords allowed the Times  newspaper copyright in reporter's verbatim transcript of a speech by Lord Roseberry, a leading politician. The reporters work was derivative, but the creation had involved expenditure of individual skill and effort.
Robertson v Lewis depicted the current judicial view, which tends to favour a reporter's copyright.

On the 14th December 2009, the European commission welcomed the ratification of the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) copyright treaties. So-called 'internet treaties' have now been introduced which are intended to make the world's copyright laws 'fit for the internet.'
 "Today is an important day for the European Union and its Member States and WIPO. We, as a group have shown our attachment to the international system of protection of copyright and related rights. These two treaties brought protection up to speed with modern technologies. As the technological evolution accelerates, protecting creators and creative industries is more urgent than ever" - Charlie McCreevy, Internal Market Commissioner.