Pages de fin
The right of reply inherently generates multiple conflicts of rights. The approach of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has long lacked clarity regarding the articulation of the different purposes of the right of reply—ensuring public access to appropriate information and protecting the res...
Spremljeno u:
| Glavni autori: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Jezik: | Français |
| Izdano: |
2024
|
| Online pristup: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| id |
cairn-RPUB1_028_0227 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
cairn |
| spelling |
cairn-RPUB1_028_0227RPUB1Raison publique https://shs.cairn.info/revue-raison-publique-2024-2-page-227?lang=fr Pages de fin Schauer, FrederickRüegger, Marc2024 fre Raison publique | 28 | 2 | 2024-11-20 | p. 227-227 | 1767-0543 RPUB1_02876 The right of reply inherently generates multiple conflicts of rights. The approach of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has long lacked clarity regarding the articulation of the different purposes of the right of reply—ensuring public access to appropriate information and protecting the respondent’s personal rights—within its control framework. Although European case-law still lacks substance today, there seems to be a progressive erosion of the democratic dimension of the right of reply, favoring its purely "personal" aspect. In a Europe marked by the rise of illiberal democracies and increasing disinformation, this narrowing of European control to solely protect reputation raises questions.Le droit de réponse est par essence générateur de conflits de droits multiples. L’approche de la Cour EDH a longtemps manqué de clarté quant à l’articulation des différentes finalités du droit de réponse – assurer l’accès du public à une information appropriée et protéger les droits de la personnalité du répondant – dans le cadre de son contrôle. Si la jurisprudence européenne manque encore aujourd’hui de consistance, un effacement progressif de la dimension démocratique du droit de réponse semble s’opérer, au profit d’une valorisation de sa dimension purement « personnelle ». Dans une Europe marquée par l’avènement de démocraties illibérales et par la montée de la désinformation, ce resserrement du contrôle européen autour de la seule protection de la réputation interroge.Cairn free access |
| language |
Français |
| format |
Article ou chapitre numérique |
| building |
0/Bibliothèque numérique/ 1/Bibliothèque numérique/Cairn/ |
| description |
The right of reply inherently generates multiple conflicts of rights. The approach of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has long lacked clarity regarding the articulation of the different purposes of the right of reply—ensuring public access to appropriate information and protecting the respondent’s personal rights—within its control framework. Although European case-law still lacks substance today, there seems to be a progressive erosion of the democratic dimension of the right of reply, favoring its purely "personal" aspect. In a Europe marked by the rise of illiberal democracies and increasing disinformation, this narrowing of European control to solely protect reputation raises questions. |
| author |
Schauer, Frederick Rüegger, Marc |
| spellingShingle |
Schauer, Frederick Rüegger, Marc Pages de fin |
| author_facet |
Schauer, Frederick Rüegger, Marc |
| author_sort |
Schauer, Frederick |
| title |
Pages de fin |
| title_short |
Pages de fin |
| title_full |
Pages de fin |
| title_fullStr |
Pages de fin |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Pages de fin |
| title_sort |
pages de fin |
| publishDate |
2024 |
| container_title |
|
| container_issue |
|
| url |
https://ezproxy.univ-orleans.fr/login?url=https://shs.cairn.info/revue-raison-publique-2024-2-page-227?lang=fr |
| _version_ |
1877246778809516033 |