Final exam review

Study &  review for the final exam in this class
It will cover the Introduction, History, Prior Restraint, Libel,  Privacy, Obscenity and Copyright chapters (cumulative from Mid-Term) along with specialized areas.

Be sure you can

  • list elements of the First Amendment and its international equivalents
  • apply general and professional ethics to a situation
  • apply knowledge of libel case law to a situation.

cases to remember

Prior restraint

Schenck v U.S., 1919
Brandenburg v Ohio, 1969
Near v Minnesota, 1931
New York Times v US, 1971

Defamation

Cherry v Des Moines Leader, 1901
Collier v Postum, 1907
New York Times v Sullivan, 1964
AP v Walker, 1967
Curtis v Butts, 1967
Texas Cattlemen v Oprah Winfree, 1998

Obscenity

Regina v Hicklin, 1868
Miller v California, 1973
Pope v Illinois, 1989
Reno v. ACLU, 1997

Copyright

Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music — 1994
Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, 1989
Sony v. Universal City Studios, 1984
MGM Studios Inc. v. Grokster Ltd., 2003
Viacom v YouTube, 2012

Privacy

Sipple v Chronicle Publishing, 1984
Flynt v Falwell, 1987
Sherrod v Brietbart,  (current case)

Journalism – FOIA, FPFT

Everyone

  • Sunshine & Open records laws
  • Shephard v Maxwell

Specialists

  • Know how to make an FOIA request
  • Know proper exemptions to Sunshine & Open records laws
  • Newsroom searches / Zurcher v Stanford Daily, 1974; also 2010 James Madison University newsroom search & what happened
  • Branzburg v Hayes, 1972 and subsequent cases (eg Judith Miller)    / Be able to explain why you support (or don’t support) reporter privilege
  • Cohen v Cowles Media, 1991
  • Gannett v DePasquale / Richmond Newspapers v Virginia (access to court)
  • Jeffrey Thomas and the Tara Rose Munsey murder trial as an example of  the impact of pre-trial publicity
  • Know ethical dimensions of Free Press / Fair Trial issues

Advertising

Everyone

  • Valentine v. Chrestensen rationale for unprotected status of commercial speech and what happened to that rationale in subsequent decades
  • Central Hudson Gas & Electric v. PSC / Four-part test for commercial speech

Specialists

  • “Right” of advertising in public media, print media and broadcast media (Lehman v Shaker Heights, Miami Herald v Tornillo, and FCC Section 315)
  • Corporate speech: Truth in advertising (Nike v. Kasky) and campaign finance (Citizens United)
  • FTC regulations:  product demonstrations & normal use
  • FTC regulations:  health and safety claims
  •  Tobacco advertising: 2010 restrictions on advertising;  RJ Reynolds v FDA, 2011, Lorillard v Reilly, 2001
  •  Liquor advertising: Rubin v Coors, 44 Liquormart v Rhode Island, Educational Media v Sweicker
  • Advertising to children: Childrens Television Act (see Broadcasting) and ethical issues

Broadcasting – Production

Everyone

  • Communications Act of 1996 (aka Telecommunications Act) and Reno v ACLU, 1997
  • Contrast broadcasting and print regulation:   Trinity Methodist Church v. FRC, 1933 as opposed to Near v. Minnesota, 1931

Specialists

  • Radio / Communication acts of 1912, 1927 and 1934, along with 1996
  • Office of Comm. of United Church of Christ v. FCC, 1969
  • Origin and cases involving Equal Time Rule (Section 315)
  • Origin and cases involving Fairness Doctrine
  • Indecency on the air:  Mae West 1937,  FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 1978 and FCC  v. Fox, 2012 
  • News distortion and hoax rules
  • Ownership rules before Communications  Act 1996
  • 2003 FCC order and cross-ownership controversy 

WEB AND NEW MEDIA

Everyone

  • 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

Specialists

  • Technology cases–  Sony, Napster,  Grokster,  recent Google/YouTube cases
  • DMCA  and similar copyright cases (Eldred, Tenenbaum)
  •  SOPA controversies – weakening of “safe harbor”
  • Internet regulation
    •   (p. 515 – 518) Consumers dont have to be given a choice of cable modems; Net neutrality legal fights have just begun
    • (557-561) Communications Decency Act went to the heart of the question of regulation, and the Supreme Court said: “The interest in encouraging freedom of expression in a democratic society outweighs any   theoretical but unproven benefit of censorship.”
    • (625 – 627) Domain names, meta tags, trademarks and the Lanham Act

Definitions, laws and concepts

  • Legal tests: strict scrutiny, intermediate scrutiny, Sullivan, Central Hudson, clear and present danger versus imminent action test, etc.
  • Five sources of law: Constitutional, Common (courts), Equity (courts), Legislative (Congress), Regulatory (Executive agencies).
  • Federal and state court systems, diversity jurisdiction
  • Court procedure and terms: certiorari, remand, protective order, warrant, demurrer, summary judgement, stare decisis, ex parte, tort, venue
  • Case citation style
  • Burden of proof in defamation cases.
  • SLAPP suits and “veggie” libel
  • Sedition acts of 1798, 1918
  • Seditious and criminal libel as opposed to civil libel
  • Five elements of libel
  • Defenses against libel and privacy suits
  • Slander as opposed to libel
  • Four types of privacy torts and how the match up to other areas of law  (Misappropriation is like copyright; intrusion is similar to trespassing; false light very similar to libel; and publication of private facts is unique)
  • Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, 1998
  • DMCA, 1998
  • Bern  Convention

People and historical events

  • Magna Carta, English Civil War, Glorious Revolution,
  • Montesque, Locke, Mill, Milton, Voltaire, Jefferson, William & Mary
  • Seditious Libel  / John Peter Zenger case
  • Virginia Constitution, First Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment
  • Alien & Sedition Act of 1798
  • Comstock Act of 1873

Ethics

You should know the basic ethical traditions and principles and be able to describe your own professional ethical code.

Essay / short answer questions

Read a brief description of a situation and decide if there is a risk of libel, invasion of privacy, incitement to riot or other legal problems

Optional essay questions — May ask for written response to issues in case law, ethics, or trends in media regulation

Sample questions:

  • Why should (or shouldn’t) journalists have a claim of privilege to protect sources?
  • As a journalist, how would you handle a leak from the prosecutor’s office when a murder trial is coming up and the jury has not been empaneled?
  • As a web designer, why the Reno v ACLU “good samaritan” provisions can protect you.
  • How you could apply “substantial transformative value” to a copyright parody situation.
  •  How has advertising regulation changed since the 1940s?
  • How have ownership regulations changed for radio and TV since the 1980s and what about that cross-ownership controversy ?
  • Why did Charles Dickens’ character Mr. Bumble say “the law is an ass” ?

Edit