English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article reviews some of the main anti-terrorism laws in Australia and New Zealand and assesses their impact upon the media in the five years since the terrorist attacks on the United States in 2001. It also makes some observations about anti-terrorism laws in the Pacific Islands and recommends further research on this important topic. It identifies the main intrusions into press freedom emanating from such laws and finds quite different approaches with resultant impacts on media freedoms. Australia, while claiming to be a liberal democracy, has taken tough measures against terrorism at the expense of some press freedoms. New Zealand, with freedom of expression protected in its Bill of Rights, has implemented counter- terrorism measures without major limitations on media freedoms. Pacific Island nations, many troubled by internal strife, appear to have been slow to comply with even the very basic international protocols on counter- terrorism.

Anti-terror laws and the media after 9/11: Three models in Australia, NZ and the Pacific