Dr Dimitris Akrivos

This article evaluates regulatory responses to stereotypical gender portrayals in advertising in the UK before and after the 2019 changes in the Advertising Standards Authority's (ASA) harm and offensiveness framework. It systematises for the first time the ASA's rulings in this territory and brings a new perspective in its modern practice by examining it within Deaux and Lewis’ theoretical framework on the multicomponent structure of gender stereotypes. We argue that the ASA's new rule and guidelines represent a missed opportunity to take bolder steps against ads that objectify or inappropriately sexualise individuals and are not sufficiently attentive to the multi-faceted nature and fluidity of modern gender identities. We conclude by making recommendations for improving the effectiveness and implementation of the ASA's guidance on the depiction of gender stereotypes.

This book explores the links between crime, deviance and popular culture in our highly-mediatised era, offering an insight into the cultural processes through which particular practices acquire a criminal or deviant status, and come to be seen as social problems. Adopting a multidisciplinary approach, the edited collection brings together international scholars across various areas of specialisation to provide an up-to-date analysis of some important and topical issues in 21st-century popular culture. The chapters look at different aspects of popular culture, including fictional detective narratives and the true crime genre, popular media constructions of sexual deviance and Islamophobia, sports, graffiti and outlaw biker subcultures. The authors examine a wide range of relevant case studies through a number of crime and deviance-related theories. Crime, Deviance and Popular Culture will be of importance to scholars and students across several disciplines, including criminology, sociology of deviance, social anthropology, media studies, cultural studies, television studies and linguistics.

Building on the view of popular culture as a conduit through which social problems are defined, debated or even resolved (Maratea & Monahan, Social Problems in Popular Culture. Bristol: Polity Press, 2016), this chapter evaluates the contribution of fictional television to the demarginalisation of the male victim of sexual violence. The research adopts a case study design and offers an ethnographic content analysis of ABC’s American Crime. It highlights the blaming and stigmatisation of the male rape victim, the shortcomings of the dominant feminist framing of sexual victimisation as well as the failure of the criminal justice system to effectively handle male rape cases. The author concludes that ‘socially aware’ TV shows like American Crime could serve as a form of ‘edutainment’: they have the strong potential to push back against dominant male rape myths and offer a better insight into the victims’ experiences, getting audiences much more emotionally involved than pertinent factual sources of information.

The article scrutinises a libel case brought by a claimant against the public prosecuting authority in England and Wales, asking the court to determine as a preliminary issue the meaning of a Charging Announcement. This case is worth consideration because it illustrates how the arguably problematic interpretation of the offence of ‘making’ indecent images of children may extend beyond the dynamics of the criminal trial to colour the adjudication of civil disputes. The article also challenges the qualities of hypothetical referees in defamation cases, suggesting that they need to be determined based on a realistic rather than an idealistic view of late modern, multi-mediated societies. The Savile scandal and other high-profile child sexual abuse cases have cultivated a climate of mistrust in which the ordinary reader is reasonably (not unduly) suspicious and should not be expected in this context to favour a less defamatory meaning over a more defamatory one.

This book analyses the criminalisation of the possession of extreme pornography through ss 63-68 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. It documents the legislative history of the offence and offers a criminological perspective on the role of the media in the construction of the extreme pornography problem. It evaluates the elements of the s 63 offence and critically reflects upon their weaknesses. Moreover, the book presents an up-to-date account of the number of prosecutions initiated and convictions obtained under s 63 since it came into force, alongside an exploration into the corresponding sentencing trends.

The article uses the private-facts lawsuit of the retired wrestler Hulk Hogan against Gawker Media as a case study to look at the challenges of balancing the media’s freedom of expression and individuals' privacy in the contemporary celebrity-centred culture. It suggests that the verdict in the privacy suit reflects the jurors' profound disenchantment with the way in which freedom of expression was subverted in this case by the media organisation. It further adopts a comparative perspective that draws parallels and highlights differences between American and English privacy law. It explores Hogan's claim through the lens of the emerging English privacy jurisprudence and identifies important lessons to be learnt for the future of the newly developed tort of misuse of private information.

This article looks at transgender media representations from the aspect of press regulation which is so far under-researched. Placing the analysis within the fragmented post-Leveson UK press landscape, it examines the two UK press watchdogs’ provisions relating to transgender reporting. The study evaluates IPSO’s and IMPRESS’ editorial standards through the lens of queer legal theory, offering a fresh perspective on the key role of these bodies in establishing (trans)gender ‘outsiders’ and ‘insiders’ in the ongoing trans rights debate of which the press forms a key part. It is argued that, although both regulators have taken steps to tackle trans-discriminatory reporting, IMPRESS’ approach seems to strike a more constructive balance between freedom of expression and trans people’s rights than IPSO. The paper concludes by making recommendations for both press regulators to address the complexities of trans issues and tackle the discursive harm of transgender media ‘othering’ more effectively.