ABSTRACT
On the basis that the Strasbourg Court's determination to protect political expression is well established, this chapter will begin by considering the matter of journalistic (interpreting that term broadly) involvement in free expression at Strasbourg, arguing that it tends to enhance the value of the speech in question, especially in relation to scrutiny of state bodies and policies. It will proceed to consider the position of media monopolies when they have come under consideration at Strasbourg, since clearly they tend to run counter to protecting plurality of expression, essential for ensuring full participation of citizens in the democratic process. Having established that in those two respects the Court has addressed the rationales for protecting political expression, the chapter will then examine the place of “extremist” expression that has a political dimension at Strasbourg, arguing that once expression is deemed “extremist” that dimension may be downgraded. Finally, this chapter will come to some conclusions as to the true adherence to the value of political expression exhibited in the Strasbourg jurisprudence and will comment on the Court's awareness of the contribution of online content to supporting democratic participation.
