Show simple item record

[journal article]

dc.contributor.authorSingh, Prabhpreetde
dc.contributor.authorKuqi, Dritonde
dc.contributor.authorSharma, Vijaylaxmide
dc.date.accessioned2023-04-19T08:32:20Z
dc.date.available2023-04-19T08:32:20Z
dc.date.issued2023de
dc.identifier.issn1857-9760de
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/86347
dc.description.abstractMany oppressive governments have passed cyber laws, cracking down on free speech, and used less traditional tactics to restrict people’s capacity to speak freely and in public. This is particularly true in nations where the government regulates media and information flow due to closed information systems. Laws regulating fake news clash with citizens’ free speech and expression rights. The paper gives an overview of the hurdles in regulating transnational cases of fake news. In cases of cross-border jurisdiction, it becomes vital to examine International legal standards, such as international agreements and international institutions governing fake news. In this paper, we look at two case studies, one from Argentina and one from Brazil, to see how these countries have dealt with the issue of fake news in cases involving transnational jurisdictions. The paper concludes with the observation that various governments employ a variety of approaches and policies in order to combat fake news.de
dc.languageende
dc.subject.ddcRechtde
dc.subject.ddcLawen
dc.subject.otherFake News; Cross-Border Jurisdictions; Freedom of Speech; Regulationsde
dc.titleRegulating fake news in transnational jurisdiction: a comparative study of Brazil and Argentinade
dc.description.reviewbegutachtet (peer reviewed)de
dc.description.reviewpeer revieweden
dc.source.journalJournal of Liberty and International Affairs
dc.source.volume9de
dc.publisher.countryMISCde
dc.source.issue1de
dc.subject.classozRechtde
dc.subject.classozLawen
dc.subject.thesozBrasiliende
dc.subject.thesozBrazilen
dc.subject.thesozArgentiniende
dc.subject.thesozArgentinaen
dc.subject.thesozFalschmeldungde
dc.subject.thesozfalse reporten
dc.subject.thesozMeinungsfreiheitde
dc.subject.thesozfreedom of opinionen
dc.subject.thesozRechtsprechungde
dc.subject.thesozjurisdictionen
dc.subject.thesozMedienrechtde
dc.subject.thesozmedia lawen
dc.subject.thesozinternationales Rechtde
dc.subject.thesozinternational lawen
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Namensnennung 4.0de
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Attribution 4.0en
internal.statusformal und inhaltlich fertig erschlossende
internal.identifier.thesoz10039751
internal.identifier.thesoz10036737
internal.identifier.thesoz10063949
internal.identifier.thesoz10044177
internal.identifier.thesoz10045603
internal.identifier.thesoz10050502
internal.identifier.thesoz10047920
dc.type.stockarticlede
dc.type.documentZeitschriftenartikelde
dc.type.documentjournal articleen
dc.source.pageinfo325-335de
internal.identifier.classoz40101
internal.identifier.journal719
internal.identifier.document32
dc.rights.sherpaGrüner Verlagde
dc.rights.sherpaGreen Publisheren
internal.identifier.ddc340
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.47305/JLIA2391331sde
dc.description.pubstatusVeröffentlichungsversionde
dc.description.pubstatusPublished Versionen
internal.identifier.sherpa1
internal.identifier.licence16
internal.identifier.pubstatus1
internal.identifier.review1
internal.pdf.validfalse
internal.pdf.wellformedtrue
internal.pdf.encryptedfalse
ssoar.urn.registrationfalsede


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record