Right of reply

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The right of reply generally means the right to defend oneself against public criticism in the same venue where it was published. In some countries, such as Brazil, it is a legal or even constitutional right. In other countries, it is not a legal right as such, but a right which certain media outlets and publications choose to grant to people who have been severely criticised by them, as a matter of policy.


Brazilian Constitution[edit]

The Brazilian Constitution guarantees the right of reply (direito de resposta).[1]

Continental Europe[edit]

In Europe, there have been proposals for a legally enforceable right of reply that applies to all media, including newspapers, magazines, and other print media, along with radio, television, and the internet. Article 1 of a 2004 Council of Europe proposal defined a right of reply as: offering a possibility to react to any information in the media presenting inaccurate facts … which affect … personal rights.[2][3]


In Australian politics, the opposition party in federal parliament is given the formal right of reply to respond to the government's budget. Two nights after the budget is presented by the Treasurer of Australia on live television, the Leader of the Opposition delivers a reply speech in parliament that is also broadcast on live TV.

Australasian Journal of Philosophy[edit]

The Australasian Journal of Philosophy's editorial policy says:[4]

[A]uthors of the materials being commented on [in Discussion Notes] may be given a right of reply (subject to the usual refereeing), on the understanding that timely publication of the Note will take priority over the desirability of including both Note and Reply in the same issue of the Journal.

United Kingdom[edit]


A right of reply can also be part of the editorial policy of a news publication or an academic journal. The BBC's Editorial Guidelines state:[5]

When our output makes allegations of wrongdoing, iniquity or incompetence or lays out a strong and damaging critique of an individual or institution the presumption is that those criticised should be given a "right of reply", that is, given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations.

See also[edit]

External links[edit]

  1. ^ [1] (article 5, V) Retrieved November 12, 2010
  2. ^ "Draft Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the Right of Reply in the New Media Environment" (PDF). 
  3. ^ "MediaWise submission to DCMS consultation". 
  4. ^ AJP: Editorial Policy Retrieved August 3, 2010
  5. ^ "BBC - Editorial Guidelines - Guidelines - Section 6: Fairness, Contributors and Consent - Right of Reply". BBC. Retrieved 2012-07-05.