Jurors who conduct online research on cases they are trying may need to be prosecuted under a new criminal offence, the Law Commission proposes in a consultation.

Courts could also be armed with additional powers compelling media organisations to take down old stories from electronic archives in order to remove potentially prejudicial material.

The Law Commission's suggestions, involving stricter controls over the use of the internet and introducing ambitious efforts to police online content, are intended to reduce the risk of contempt of court and protect a defendant's right to a fair trial.

Confiscating jurors' mobile phones and internet-enabled devices when they attend court should also be considered, the Law Commission contemplates in its consultation paper on reforming the laws governing contempt of court. Online service providers, such as Google and Facebook, may already be seen as publishers under the 1981 Contempt of Court Act but extra controls could be required, the consultation says.

Critics of the initiative may question whether it is practicable to keep raising barriers against new technology at a time when internet use is ever more pervasive, bloggers and citizen journalists proliferate and websites can be read from anywhere in the world.

One relaxation of restrictions proposed would allow jurors to reveal what happened during jury room deliberations if they genuinely believed it was necessary to expose a miscarriage of justice.

Professor David Ormerod, the Law Commissioner leading the project, said: "The purpose of our consultation is to ask how, in a modern, internet-connected society, the law of contempt can continue to support the principles that criminal cases should be tried only on the evidence heard in court.

"We are seeking ways to protect the administration of justice and the defendant's right to a fair trial while keeping to a minimum interference with the right of media organisations and private individuals to publish."

Concerns over the continuing effectiveness of the 1981 Contempt of Court Act have been raised by a series of cases, including the vilification of Chris Jefferies by some papers during the Joanna Yeates murder inquiry in Bristol and the jailing of the university lecturer Theodora Dallas who told other jurors what she had found while researching a defendant online.Announcing the consultation, the Law Commission said: "The internet, and the opportunities it offers media organisations and individual citizens to publish information and comment to vast audiences instantaneously, have radically changed the communication landscape.

"Blogs, Twitter, Facebook, Google+ and other social networking sites enable ordinary people to engage in public conversation and express their views on a scale and at a speed that has never before been possible."Once information has been released on the web, it is very hard to contain. And, unless steps are taken to remove it, it remains easily available to anyone with access to the internet in a way that is not true of printed materials.

"The commission is asking what safeguards can be put in place to prevent jurors searching for, and being able to find, potentially prejudicial material during the course of a trial, irrespective of when it was published."

Jurors should be better informed about their responsibility not to seek out information on a defendant. The existing contempt law, the commission says, may not criminalise all forms of research by jurors about cases and therefore a new offence of intentionally seeking information relevant to the case they are trying may be required.

A study by Professor Cheryl Thomas in 2010 found that around 12% of jurors involved in high profile cases admitted they had looked for information about cases they were trying. A greater range of penalties may be needed.

Any statutory powers requiring media organisations or other publishers to take down potentially prejudicial content released before proceedings became active would require courts to make a formal request.

The police should also be required to give more information about when a suspect has been arrested and contempt restrictions begin to restrict the media's ability to report proceedings in the interests of justice, the commission proposes.

The Law Commission's consultation runs until 28 February 2013.