First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the
right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of
grievances.
Match up some ethical traditions
__4__
Utilitarian
ethics
1. Emphasis on ideal, allegory of the cave
__3__
Epicurian
tradition
2.
__2__
Aristotle
__1__
Plato
__5__
Duty ethics
Nichomanchian Ethics held that reason used to create happiness gives us
moral and intellectual virtues. The moral virtues include moderation,
courage, magnanimity and the intellectual virtues include science, art, and
philosophical wisdom.
3. The Golden Mean, the idea that we should seek moderation in all thing
4. The greatest good for the greatest number is what is right
5. Categorical imperative; do what would be right if everyone did it.
Match the privacy cases with their descriptions
A juvenile was identified by the media, contrary to West Virginia
1. state law. The US Supreme Court said that if the identification was
by legal means, such laws were overly broad and not constitutional.
__4__
Sidis v. F.R.
Publishing,1940
__5__
Sipple v. Chronicle
Publishing, 1984
__2__
Cox. v. Cohn, 1975
__3 _
Howard v. Des
Moines Register,
1979
__1__
Smith v. Daily Mail,
1979
Identification of a rape victim from public records by a Georgia
2. broadcaster wasn't invasion of privacy (even if it was a breach of
ethics).
The identity of a woman who was forcibly sterilized by state
3. government was revealed, and she sued, unsuccessfully, for
invasion of privacy.
A mathematical genius lost a suit against the New Yorker for
invasion of privacy after the magazine wrote about his lack of
4. success 20 years later. A federal appeals court said someone who
had become a celebrity even involuntarily could not avoid all
publicity later on.
The news media revealed that a man who prevented the
assassination of then-president Gerald Ford was homosexual. The
5. court ruled that this personal information was newsworthy and not
an invasion of privacy, although later, journalists had ethical regrets
about their reports.
Match the cases with descriptions
__1__
Regina v. Hicklin
__3__
Roth v US
__6__
FCC v. Pacifica
Foundation
__2__
One Book
Entitled Ulysses
v US
__5__
Pope v Illinois
__4__
Miller v California
__7__
Fox v. FCC
1.
1868 British case where strict standard is set against obscenity is
created
2.
1933 - Federal standard changes from Hicklin rule to effects on the
average person
1957 case setting obscenity rule as "whether to the average person,
3. applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of
the material taken as a whole appeals to the prurient interest. "
4. 1973 case Allowed local standards for judging obscenity
5.
1987 case where community standard of Miller was modified by a
national perspective
6.
George Carlin's Seven Dirty Words case = safe harbor hours set for
broadcast indecency
7.
2008 case challenging FCC fines for off the cuff indecent remarks
From what case does the doctrine of actual malice originate? New York Times vs. Sullivan 1964
Which two cases refined the concept of reckless disregard ? AP v Walker and Curtis v Butts
Which case is most important in determining who is and is not a public figure in an action for defamation?
Gertz v Welch
Burden of proof is on the plaintiff in the United States.
The most important libel cases are Sullivan, Curtis and AP. However, here are some others you should know
about.
__1__
Cherry v Des Moines
Leader
1.
__5__
Cape Wind v.
Donnelan
2. 1907 case involving false and dangerous advertising
__4__
Hutchinson v
Proxmire
4. Case defining privilege in public relations
__3__
Gertz v Welch
__2__
Collier v Postum
1901 case where court said a public performance may be
discussed with the fullest freedom,
3. Case defining who is a public figure
Recent case involving falsely representing opposition to an energy
5. project
Journalism
Sunshine laws are similar to FOIA laws, but require that local, state or federal legislative or executive
hearings take place in public buildings with adequate notification to the public. Executive sessions
are possible under some circumstances (personnel, legal issues, for example) but all decisions must
be made in public sessions.
Shepard v Maxwell 1966 examined the rights of freedom of the press in the first amendment when
weighed against a defendant’s right to a fair trial as required by the 6th amendment. The judge failed
to protect Sheppard from the massive publicity that attended his prosecution.
Advertising
Valentine v Chrestensen The Supreme Court said that the First Amendment does not apply to
commercial advertising. F.J Chrestensen had a surplus Navy submarine on display and was
advertising it with handbills passed out on New York streets. However , a city ordinance allowed only
political handbills on the street. The court said that the Constitution “imposes no restraint on
government as respects commercial advertising.”
Central Hudson gas and electric v. PSC: This case is important as a major test of the validity of
government restrictions on commercial and corporate speech. The PSC had issued rules forbidding
advertising that might encourage consumption of electricity. (It was the “energy crisis,” after all.)
Central Hudson challenged the rules. The Supreme Court used the case to issue a FOUR PART TEST
for determining whether government restrictions are valid:
1. Does the ad involve a lawful activity?
2. Is there a substantial government interest?
3. Does the regulation advance this interest?
4. Is the regulation the least restrictive means to serve the interest?
Broadcasting
Communications Act of 1996 – Major reorganization and deregulation of the media marketplace,
which has led to many mergers, reduced distinctions between common carriers and mass media.
Among provisions:



Required V-Chip to filter violent programming in all new TV sets
Communications Decency Act was part of this and was struck down in Reno v. ACLU
1997
Switch to Digital Television in 2009
Reno v ACLU, 1997 — struck down the Communications Decency Act (part of the Telecomm act of
1996)


Court said the internet is “fully protected” but broadcasting content is regulated
(because of intrusiveness, scarcity of spectrum)
Court said “Good Samaritan” filtering could stand.
Zeran v AOL (testing “Good Samaritan” and ISP liability). Case involved ISP liability for things that
an independent speaker said about a plaintiff
Trinity Methodist Church v. FRC: A Los Angeles church had a radio license and claimed a First
Amendment interest in maintaining it. The Supreme Court said radio licenses were properly regulated by
FRC (FCC) and upheld what was in effect prior restraint. A similar case involved Dr. John Brinkley who
was able to broadcast from KFKB radio all over the Midwest, advocating medically fraudulent implants
of supposedly rejuvenating animal organs. When his medical license was revoked in 1930, the FCC
followed by revoking his broadcast license
Near v. Minnesota: was a United States Supreme Court decision that recognized the freedom of the press
by roundly rejecting prior restraints on publication, a principle that was applied to free speech generally in
subsequent jurisprudence. The Court ruled that a Minnesota law that targeted publishers of "malicious" or
"scandalous" newspapers violated the First Amendment to the United States Constitution (as applied
through the Fourteenth Amendment). Legal scholar and columnist Anthony Lewis called Near the Court's
"first great press case
Match the following legal term definitions
__2__
ex parte
1. Allows case to move to Supreme Court
__7__
plaintiff
2. A one sided legal action
__3__
stare decisis
3. The precedent stands
__6__
voir dire
4. Type of civil lawsuit, sometimes called slips and trips
__4__
tort
__5__
venue
__1__
certiorari
5. Location of a trial
6. jury selection
7. the party brining a civil action to the court
Strict Scrutiny:
hierarchy of standards that courts use to weigh the government's interest against a
constitutional right or principle
to show that information is false; the media doesn’t even have to show its
true, even in a case where a private person is suing about public issue.
Burden of Proof:
SLAPP Case Dixon v. Superior Court of Orange County, 1994 Strategic lawsuit against public
participation- a retired college professor who questioned the competence of an environmental
assessment company was sued
Texas Beef Group v. Oprah Winfrey- Veggie Libel, product disparagement