1. Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice England and Wales ‘Speech by Lord Judge Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales: Society of Editors Annual Conference’ (London: Judiciary of England and Wales and Tribunal Judiciary, 2009) p 2; available at http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/speeches/2009/speech-lord-judge-17112009 (accessed 29 May 2012).

2. Mathiesen, T ‘The viewer society: Michel Foucault's ‘Panopticon’ revisited’ (1997) 1(2) Theo Crim 215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. Mulcahy, L Legal Architecture: Justice, Due Process and the Place of Law (Abingdon: Routledge, 2011) ch 5.Google Scholar

4. Genn, H Paths to Justice: What people Do and Think about Going to Law (Oxford: Hart, 1999).Google Scholar

5. Thompson, JB Political Scandal: Power and Visibility in the Media Age (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2000) p 35.Google Scholar

6. Page, B, Wake, R and Ames, A Public Confidence in the Criminal Justice System, Home Office Findings 221 (London: Home Office, 2004).Google Scholar

7. Haltom, W Reporting on the Courts: How the Mass Media Cover Judicial Actions (Chicago: Nelson Hall, 1998) p 7.Google Scholar

8. See eg Lord Judge Lord Chief Justice England and Wales ‘The judiciary and the media’ (London: Judiciary of England and Wales and Tribunal Judiciary, 2011); available at http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/speeches/2011/lcj-speech-judiciary-and-the-media (accessed 25 May 2012); Lambert, P Courting Publicity: Twitter and Television Cameras in Court (Haywards Heath: Bloomsbury Professional, 2011).Google Scholar In February 2012, the City University London hosted a seminar, Justice Wide Open: Courts and Legal Information in the Digital Age. Copies of the working papers can be accessed at http://lawjusticejournalism.org/2012/03/02/justice-wide-open-courts-and-legal-information-in-the-digital-age/ (accessed 28 August 2012). This ensemble of ideas is an organising principle that informs the papers in this collection.

9. Hough, M and Roberts, JV ‘Confidence in justice: an international review’, ICRP Research Paper No 3 (London: Kings College, 2004 Google Scholar); Lord Falconer ‘Introduction’ in Broadcasting Courts Seminar, 10 January 2005 (London: Department of Constitutional Affairs, 2005); Moorhead, R, Sefton, M and Scanlan, L Just Satisfaction? What Drives Public and Participant Satisfaction with Courts and Tribunals, Research Series 5/08 (London: Ministry of Justice, 2008). The report is available at https://www.law.cf.ac.uk/research/pubs/repository/1854.pdf.Google Scholar

10. Hough and Roberts, above n 9, p 2.

11. Ibid, p 1.

12. Genn, H Judging Civil Justice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010) pp 145–148, 165.Google Scholar

13. There is a small literature on the changing relations between the various stakeholders that populate the interface between the media, the courts and the judiciary in England and Wales. See eg Lord Judge Lord Chief Justice England and Wales ‘Foreword’ in Anon Reporting Restrictions in the Criminal Courts (London: Judicial Studies Board, Newspaper Society, Society of Editors and Times Newspapers Ltd, 2009); European Network of Councils for the Judiciary Project Team Justice Society and the Media. Report 2011–12 (Brussels: European Network of Councils for the Judiciary, 2012). Other work covers a range of more specific topics. This includes: Anon Reporting Restrictions, idem; Judge, above n 1; Rozenberg, J ‘Book review: the reporter often knows best’ (2001) 12 Br Journal Rev 71; European Network of Councils for the Judiciary Project Team, idem; on the establishment of a court and judicial communications office for England and Wales,CrossRefGoogle Scholar see Bruntartin, M ‘The crime beat is hard labour’ (2007) 18 Br Journal Rev 33 andGoogle Scholar Gies, L Law and the Media: the Future of an Uneasy Relationship (Abingdon: Routledge-Cavendish, 2008);Google Scholar and on policy debates about the impact of technology – in particular, the camera – see Stepniak, D Audio-Visual Coverage of Courts: A Comparative Analysis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008) and Lambert, above n 8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar On new forms of communications such as ‘Twitter’, see: Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice England and Wales ‘A consultation on the use of live, text-based forms of communications from court for the purposes of fair and accurate reporting; a consultation paper issued by the judicial office for England and Wales’ (London: Judiciary of England and Wales and Tribunal Judiciary, 2010), available at http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/media-releases/2011/courtreporting (accessed 28 August 2012); Lambert, above n 8; Practice guidance ‘The use of live text based forms of communication (including Twitter) from court for the purposes of fair and accurate reporting’, (London: Judiciary of England and Wales and Tribunal Judiciary, 2011), available at http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/publications-and-reports/guidance/2011/courtreporting (accessed 28 August 2012). One of the limitations of the research exploring stakeholder relationships and the debates on the use of visual and digital technologies is that it rarely touches on the topic of the news representations themselves. Without a clearer picture of the current state of news reports, a key part of the picture necessary to develop and later evaluate reforms is missing from the key domestic policy and reform debates.

14. The national newspaper sample is made up of the Daily Express, the Daily Mail, the Daily Mirror, The Daily Telegraph, the Financial Times, The Guardian, The Independent, the Daily Star, The Sun and The Times. Where a regional centre had both a daily morning as well as an evening paper, both were included. The English regional Press sample is made up of the Birmingham Mail, the Lancashire Telegraph, the London Metro, the London Evening Standard, the Manchester Evening News, Newcastle's Journal, the Newcastle Evening Chronicle, the Sheffield Star, York's Press, the Yorkshire Post and the Yorkshire Evening Post. The sample of papers from Wales consists of three titles: the South Wales Argus, the South Wales Echo and the Western Mail. Special thanks are due to all those who provided me with the regional copy: Ian Brownlee, Richard Collier, Paul Johnson, Annie Moran, Brian Moran, Helen Power and Alex Sharpe.

15. M Berlins ‘Loss of court reporters is a blow to open justice’ The Guardian, 7 December 2009, available at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/dec/06/berlins-writ-large-court-reporters (accessed 3 September 2012). New technology also provides new opportunities for reporting court activities: D Banks ‘Court reporting is a dying art – and lawyers should be worried’ The Guardian, 19 October 2010, available at http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2010/oct/19/court-reporting-dying-art-lawyers (accessed 3 September 2012). See eg D Banks ‘Trial by Twitter’ The Guardian, 14 August 2012, available at http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/aug/14/court-reporters-twitter (accessed 3 September 2012).

16. The move from paper to screen delivery impacts on the temporal and spatial qualities of news reports. For example, delivery of new reports via the screen is no longer confined to particular delivery times. Also, distribution of those reports is no longer so geographically limited. For an example of research that examines the impact of these changes on representations of courts, see Fox, Rl, Van Sickel, Rw and Steiger, Tl Tabloid Justice: Criminal Justice in an Age of Media Frenzy (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2010).Google Scholar

17. The phrase ‘judicial family’ is used to refer to the collective body of 42,000 judicial office holders in England and Wales – judges, tribunal members and magistrates. Judges of the UK Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal and the High Court, Circuit Judges, Recorders and District Judges account for 3694 of those post holders.

18. Perhaps the best example of this scholarship is Cohen, E Talk on the Wilde Side (London: Routledge, 1993).Google Scholar The most famous is Hyde, H Montgomery The Trials of Oscar Wilde (New York: Dover, 1973).Google Scholar

19. Jones, Pj and Wardle, C ‘“No emotion, no sympathy”: the visual construction of Maxine Carr’ (2008) 4(1) Crime, Media, Culture 53. Carr was charged with perverting the course of justice while her boyfriend was charged with murder. Jones and Wardle argue that the visual images in newspaper reports played a key role in representing Carr as an accomplice, a more serious offence.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20. Nead, L ‘Visual cultures of the courtroom: reflections on history, law and the image’ (2002) 3(2) Vis Cult Br 119;Google Scholar Nead, L ‘Freedom from publicity or right to information? Visual cultures of the courtroom’ in Kjell, A, Modéer, A and Sunnquist, M (eds) Legal Stagings (Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 2012) p 59. Nead's work seeks to examine the impact of the statutory ban on visual image making in or near the court: Criminal Justice Act 1925, s 41. There is a body of scholarship on this prohibition and challenges to it.Google ScholarSee Stepniak, above n 13; Rubin, G ‘Seddon, Dell and rock and roll: investigating alleged breaches on the ban on publishing photographs taken within courts or their precincts, 1925–1967’ (2008) Crim L Rev 874;Google Scholar Lembert, above n 8. The ban has been described as the ‘crunch issue’ for relations between the courts and media in England and Wales. See Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales ‘13th Annual Justice Lecture: The judiciary and the media’ (London: Judiciary of England and Wales and Tribunal Judiciary, 2011) at 5, available at http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/speeches/2011/lcj-speech-annual-justice-2011-19102011 (accessed 28 August 2012). See also Department of Constitutional Affairs Broadcasting Courts, Consultation Paper CP 28/04 (London: Department of Constitutional Affairs, 2004). As a result of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, s 47, the ban no longer applies to the proceedings of the UK Supreme Court. The 1925 Act never applied to Scotland or Northern Ireland. In May 2012, the Queen's Speech contained a reference to improving ‘the transparency’ of the courts and tribunal service, which will include reform of the 1925 prohibition on cameras in courts in England and Wales: see http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/queens-speech-2012 (accessed 28 August 2012).

21. Soothill, K and Walby, S Sex Crime in the News (London: Routledge, 1991).Google Scholar

22. Ibid, ch 4.

23. Hough and Roberts, above n 9.

24. Chibnall, S Law and Order News: An Analysis of Crime Reporting in the British Press (London: Tavistock, 1977);Google Scholar Schlesinger, P and Tumber, H Reporting Crime: The Media Politics of Criminal Justice (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994);Google Scholar Mawby, R Policing Images: Policing Communication and Legitimacy (Cullompton: Willan, 2002);Google Scholar Leishman, F and Mason, P Policing and the Media: Facts, Fictions and Factions (Cullompton: Willan, 2003);Google Scholar Jewkes, Y Media and Crime (London: SAGE Publications, 2004);Google Scholar Greer, C and Reiner, R ‘Mediated mayhem: media crime and criminal justice’ in Maguire, M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (eds) Oxford Handbook of Criminology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012) p 245;Google Scholar Greer, C and McLaughlin, E ‘Public order policing, new media environments and the rise of the citizen journalist’ (2010) 50 Br J Criminol 1041;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Greer, C and McLaughlin, E ‘Trial by media: policing, the 24-7 news mediasphere and the “politics of outrage”’ (2010) 15(1) Theo Crim 23;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Greer, C and McLaughlin, E ‘“This is not justice”: Ian Tomlinson, institutional failure and the Press politics of outrage’ (2012) 52 Br J Criminol 52, 274. Representations of prisons are another area of scholarship that touches on the mass media representations of criminal justice.CrossRefGoogle Scholar See eg Mason, P Captured by the Media: Prison Discourse in Popular Culture (Cullompton: Willan, 2006).Google Scholar

25. Dixon, T ‘The tears of Mr Justice Willes’ (2012) 17(1) J Vict Cult 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

26. Darbyshire, P Sitting in Judgment: The Working Lives of Judges (Oxford: Hart, 2011) ch 2.Google Scholar

27. Moran, Lj ‘Every picture speaks a thousand words: visualizing judicial authority in the Press’ in Priska, G, Borella, S Steinert and Wiedmer, C (eds) Intersections of Law and Culture (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2012) p 31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28. For an introduction to debates on the visual aspects of Press reports, see eg Barnhurst, Kg and Nerone, J The Form of News: A History (New York: The Guilford Press, 2001);Google Scholar Domke, D, Perlmutter, D and Spratt, M (2002) ‘The prime of our times? an examination of the “power” of visual images’ (2002) 3(2) Journalism 131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29. Soothill, K, Walby, S and Bagguley, P ‘Judges, media and rape’ (1990) 17(2) J Law & Soc'y 211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

30. Soothill et al, above n 29.

31. Darbyshire, above n 26.

32. There are some exceptions to this general rule. For examples of Australian research, see Schulz, Pd Courts and Judges on Trial: Analysing and Managing the Discourses of Disapproval (London: Lit Vertag, 2011);Google Scholar Schulz, Pd ‘Rougher than usual media treatment: a discourse analysis of media reporting and justice on trial’ (2008) 17(4) J Jud Admin 1.Google Scholar On media representations and court communications in Australia, see Hunter, R ‘The high price of success: the backlash against women judges in Australia’ in Sheehy, Ea and McIntyre, S (eds) Calling for Change: Women, Law and the Legal Profession (Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 2006) p 281;Google Scholar Johnston, J ‘The impact of the media on the court process: preliminary findings’ (1998) 20(1) Austl Journal Rev 104;Google Scholar Johnston, J ‘Are courts becoming more media friendly?’ (1999) 21(1) Austl Journal Rev 109.Google Scholar

33. See eg Davis, R Decisions and Images: The Supreme Court and the Press (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1994);Google Scholar Diascro, Js ‘The legacy of Chief Justice Rhenquist: a view from the small screen’ (2008) 92(3) Judicature 106;Google Scholar Gray, Dl The Supreme Court and the News Media (Evanston, IL: Northwestern Press, 1968);Google Scholar Greenhouse, L ‘Telling the court's story: justice and journalism in the Supreme Court’ (1996) 105(6) Yale L J 1537;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Hale, Fd ‘Court decisions as information sources for journalists: how journalists can better cover appellate decisions’ (2000) 109 U Ark Little Rock L Rev 111;Google Scholar Jamieson, Pw ‘Lost in translation: civic journalism's applicability to newspaper coverage of the U.S [sic] Supreme Court’ (1998) 20 Communs & Law 1;Google Scholar Slotnik, Ee and Segal, Ja Television News and the Supreme Court: All the News That's Fit to Air? (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar The preoccupation with the highest court is also to be found in research in other jurisdictions, eg Canada and Israel: see, respectively Sauvageau, F, Schneiderman, D and Taras, D The Last Word: Media Coverage of the Supreme Court of Canada (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2006) andGoogle Scholar Bogoch, B and Holzman-Gazit, Y ‘Mutual bonds: media frames and the Israeli High Court of Justice’ (2008) 33 Law & Soc Inquiry 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34. Dreschel, Re ‘How Minnesota newspapers cover the trial courts’ (1978) 62 Judicature 195–202;Google Scholar Drechsel, Re News Making in the Trial Courts (New York: Longman, 1983);Google Scholar Dreschel, Re ‘Dealing with bad news: how trial judges respond to inaccurate and critical publicity’ (1988) 13(3) Just System J 308;Google Scholar Haltom, , above n 7.Google Scholar

35. Haltom, , above n 7.Google Scholar

36. There is also a significant body of US research and scholarship on cameras in courts. For a useful summary, see Stepniak, above n 13; Lambert, above n 8.

37. Dreschel (1983), above n 34, p 21.

38. Haltom, , above n 7, p 155.Google Scholar

39. The link between crime and sensational reporting has a long history in the west. See eg Wiltenburg, J ‘True crime: the origins of modern sensationalism’ (2004) 109(5) Am Hist Rev 1377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

40. Brooks, P The Melodramatic Imagination (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1976);Google Scholar Williams, L Playing the Race Card: Melodrama of Black and White from Uncle Tom to O.J. Simpson (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001).Google Scholar

41. Haltom, above n 7, ch 5.

42. Mawby, above n 24.

43. Gies, above n 13.

44. For more information about the role of the inquiry, see the Inquiry's official website, http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/ (accessed 3 September 2012).

45. There is anecdotal evidence of informal links between journalists, newspaper editors and judges. See eg O Bowcott ‘Justice Secretary is questioned over judges' lunchtime drinking’ The Guardian, 21 November 2012, available at http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/nov/21/justice-secretary-judge-lunchtime-drinking (accessed 24 November 2012).

46. Lord Woolf ‘Should the media and judiciary be on speaking terms?’ The 8th RTÉ/UCD Law Faculty Lecture (2003), available at http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/speeches/2003/should-media-judiciary-be-on-speaking-terms (accessed 20 June 2012).

47. Rubin, above n 20; Stepniak, above n 13.

48. See Haltom, , above n 7, p 168. More recent US research argues that a massive increase in media representations of trials continues to focus on a small number of cases that have little legal significance.Google Scholar See Fox, et al, above n 16.Google Scholar

49. Soothill and Walbey, above n 21, ch 4.

50. Haltom, above n 7, p 183;Soothill and Walby, above n 21, pp 17, 65.

51. Dreschel (1983), above n 34.

52. Ibid, p 65.

53. Moran, above n 27.

54. Chibnall, above n 24, p 13.

55. Haltom, above n 7, ch 2.

56. Jewkes, above n 24.

57. Mawby, Rc ‘Chibnall revisited: crime reporters, the police and ‘law and order news’ (2010) 50 Br J Criminol 1060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

58. See Fox et al, above n 16, pp 11–12.

59. This includes one report on the courts and the judiciary in Scotland; HorneB ‘Ex-salmon poacher 78 is jailed for going back to river 43 years after he was banned’ Daily Mail, 16 February 2012.

60. Anon ‘Farm sales to China blocked’ The Independent, 16 February 2012.

61. HepworthC ‘Sun, sea and a 10 minute divorce – yours for £4,500’ Western Mail, 16 February 2012.

62. Anon ‘Tiny flaw in sex rap’ The Sun, 16 February 2012.

63. This includes those courts that have direct relevance to domestic law, such as the European Court of Human Rights.

64. Anon ‘Mulcaire granted hack case appeal’ Lancashire Telegraph, 16 February 2012.

65. Daily Telegraph Reporter ‘Scientist who quit job over professor's “yelling” wins £30,000’ The Daily Telegraph, 12 February 2012.

66. BurrellI ‘Pub landlords face jail in new Sky crackdown on Tv football’ The Independent, 16 February 2012.

67. One report that appeared in a number of the national papers related to witness anonymity programmes in criminal trials. Reports focused on compensation paid to a witness whose identity had been granted anonymity and then was named by the prosecution, causing the witness and family to flee from their home. See DavenportJ and BenthamM ‘Yard and Cps pledge to protect witnesses’ London Evening Standard, 16 February 2012.

68. PillingD ‘India's “bumble bee” defies gravity’ Financial times, 16 February 2012.

69. CattonR ‘Killer “could soon walk free from York jail”’ The Press, 16 February 2012.

70. A Nexis search revealed that the case was reported in the digital editions of The Guardian and The Independent. It also appeared in a smaller and cheaper sister publication of The Independent. Addition regional papers reports were also discovered but not included in the analysis.

71. Sugar (Deceased) (Represented by Fiona Paveley) v British Broadcasting Corporation [2012] UKSC 4.

72. See eg Daily Telegraph Reporter ‘Obese woman who demands carers to help her get out of bed and take her to the disco’ The Daily Telegraph, 16 February 2012.

73. See eg GibbonsB ‘Express challenges Spelman injunction’ Birmingham Mail, 16 February 2012.

74. Anon ‘Naked rambler fined’ Sheffield Star, 16 February 2012.

75. WoodV ‘Naked rambler sees his cover story fall down’ (front page) and ‘Naked rambler kept a score of public reactions’ The Daily Telegraph, 16 February 2012, 5.

76. Anon ‘Naked rambler “surprised” by court's reaction’ Yorkshire Post, 16 February 2012.

77. BainesJ ‘Naked rambler fined after stroll in park’ Yorkshire Evening Post, 16 February 2012.

78. Anon ‘Naked rambler kept score of reactions at beauty spot’ The times, 16 February 2012.

79. Anon ‘Backpack and crack’ The Sun, 16 February 2012.

80. Anon ‘Rambler stripped of £315 for bare cheek’ Metro, 16 February 2012.

81. Narain J ‘Naked hiker who found a policeman in his path’ Daily Mail, 16 February 2012.

82. Anon, above n 76; Baines, above n 77.

83. Chibnall, above n 24, pp 31–33.

84. Fox etal., above n 16, pp 6–7.

85. Ibid, p 6.

86. Soothill and Walby, above n 21, p 65.

87. Ibid, p 146. Keer's appeal against conviction was successful. The appeal did receive some Press: see eg E Allen ‘Not another naked rambler! Naturist vows to continue his walks after judge overturns his conviction for causing distress to woman dog walker’ Mailonline, 9 October 2012, available at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2215043/Not-naked-rambler-Naturist-vows-continue-walks-judge-overturns-conviction-causing-distress-woman-dog-walker.html (accessed 19 March 2013).

88. Sugar v British Broadcasting Corporation, above n 71.

89. Anon ‘Bbc bias claim rejected’ The times, 16 February 2012.

90. McDermottN and ThomasL ‘Bbc wins its £350,000 legal battle to suppress Israel report’ Daily Mail, 16 February 2012.

91. Anon ‘Bbc wins test case over “anti-Israel” bias’ The Daily Telegraph, 16 February 2012.

92. Anon, above n 64.

93. Ibid. The decision of the court was reported in other national papers on 15 February. The appeal was heard in May 2012. The judgment rejecting the appeal was delivered on 4 July 2012. See Phillips v Mulcaire [2012] UKSC 28.

94. StretchE ‘Date with terror’ Daily Mirror, 16 February 2012.

95. Daily Telegraph Reporter ‘Fireman is cleared in seat belt row with Pc “out to hit targets”’ The Daily Telegraph, 16 February 2012.

96. Daily Telegraph Reporter, above n 65.

97. KirbyD ‘Riddle over fork lift truck death of factory worker’ Manchester Evening News, 16 February 2012.

98. The Crown Court and the Coroner's Court also include a jury. There are few explicit references to the jury in the data set reports.

99. Haltom, above n 7, p 176.

100. Ibid, p 172.

101. Chibnall, above n 24, p 23.

102. Ibid, pp 24–26.

103. See eg TahirT ‘Minister's son, 17, blocks story with injunction’ Metro, 16 February 2012.

104. See eg Daily Telegraph Reporter, above n 72.

105. Fishman M Manufacturing the News (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1980) p 74.

106. Ibid, p 70.

107. Fishman, above n 105, p 68.

108. Burrell, above n 66, p 59.

109. LawP ‘Councillor in call to ban prayers’ South Wales Echo, 16 February 2012; Anon ‘We say in our opinion: Do we need court to rule on religion?’ South Wales Echo, 16 February 2012.

110. Fishman, above n 105, p 60.

111. Soothill and Walby, above n 21, ch 2.

112. See eg Stretch, above n 24.

113. Sugar v British Broadcasting Corporation, above n 71.

114. As is standard practice, the Court provided a two-page ‘Press release’ that includes a page detailing the reasons for the decision.

115. Anon, above n 89.

116. Anon, above n 91.

117. Ibid.

118. McDermott and Thomas, above n 90.

119. Chibnall, above n 24, pp 37–41.

120. RipponP ‘Judge hits out at new cannabis law’ Sheffield Star, 16 February 2012.

121. SabeyR and PollardC ‘93,000 say scram; Sun readers back call to kick out vile Quatada’ The Sun, 16 February 2012.

122. NeubergerLord ‘Open justice unbound? Judicial Studies Board Annual Lecture 2011’ (London: Judiciary of England and Wales and Tribunal Judiciary, 2011), available at http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/speeches/2011/mr-speech-jsb-annual-lecture-16032011 (accessed 31 May 2012).