Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
53 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
State Legislatures
|
Fourteenth Amendment prevents STATES from taking LIFE, LIBERTY
or PROPERTY without DUE PROCESS of law. |
|
|
The Doctrine of Incorporation
|
(applying the 1st Amendment to the states
through the 14th Amendment’s prohibition against the states’ taking of one’s liberty without due process) => 1st Amendment incorporated into the 14th Amendment and applied to the states |
|
|
Fourteenth Amendment
|
prevents STATES from taking LIFE, LIBERTY
or PROPERTY without DUE PROCESS of law. |
|
|
Gitlow v. New York (1925)
|
US supreme court ruled that 1st Amendment prohibits states from restricting free speech due to the process clause in the 14th Amendment
|
|
|
No law
|
some leeway
|
|
|
Theoretical Background/Philosophical Approaches
|
Individual serves the state
Authoritarian — power from God (divine right of kings) Totalitarian — power from the people The state serves individual . Libertarian — media purpose to inform, entertain, sell, serve as forum for the discovery of truth AND serve as a check on government (power from deity) Social Responsibility — media purpose to inform, entertain, sell, raise conflict to the plane of discussion (power from people) |
|
|
Individual serves the state
|
Authoritarian
Totalitarian |
|
|
Authoritarian
|
power from God (divine right of kings)
|
|
|
Totalitarian
|
power from the people
|
|
|
The state serves individual
|
Libertarian
Social Responsibility |
|
|
Libertarian
|
media purpose to inform, entertain, sell, serve as
forum for the discovery of truth AND serve as a check on government (power from deity) |
|
|
Social Responsibility
|
media purpose to inform, entertain, sell,raise conflict to the plane of discussion (power from people)
|
|
|
Authoritarian Theory
|
Government patents, guilds, licensing, sometimes censorship
|
|
|
Libertarian Theory
|
Self-righting process of truth in free marketplace of ideas, or by courts
|
|
|
Totalitarian Theory
|
Surveillance and economic or political action of government
|
|
|
Social Responsibility Theory
|
Community opinion, consumer action,
ethics |
|
|
Libertarian Theory Exceptions
|
Defamation
Public Morality Obscenity Indecency Wartime Sedition |
|
|
Defamation
|
harm to reputation
|
|
|
Public Morality
|
indecency
obscenity |
|
|
Obscenity
|
offensive desc. of sexual activity
|
|
|
indecency
|
offensive descriptions of body parts and bodily functions
|
|
|
Wartime Sedition
|
language aiming at overthrowing government
|
|
|
Social Responsibility Theory Exceptions
|
Invasion of Privacy
Vital Societal Interests |
|
|
Vital Societal Interests
|
Fair Trial
Copyright/Trademark Self-Incrimination/The Right NOT To Speak The “Public’s Right To Know” |
|
|
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)
|
Court articulated the fighting words doctrine, a limitation of the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech.
|
|
|
Snyder v. Phelps (2011)
|
whether the First Amendment protected protests of public protestors at a funeral against tort liability.
Snyder - the grieving father phelps- the protester The Court ruled in favor of Phelps in an 8-1 decision, holding that their speech related to a public issue, and was disseminated on a public sidewalk. |
|
|
New York v. Ferber (1982)
|
child pornography
he Court ruled unanimously that the First Amendment right to free speech did not forbid states from banning the sale of material depicting children engaged in sexual activity |
|
|
U.S. v. Stevens (2010)
|
ruled against animal “crush” videos
a federal statute criminalizing the commercial production, sale, or possession of depictions of cruelty to animals. |
|
|
Brown v. Entertainment Merchants
|
struck down a California law enacted in 2005 that bans the sale of certain violent video games to children without parental supervision.
video games were protected speech under the First Amendment as other forms of media |
|
|
Press
|
Newspapers/Magazines/Books
Of course, print media Pamphlets, billboards, bumper stickers, etc. |
|
|
Mutual Film v. Industrial Commission of Ohio (1915)
|
Films are entertainment, not expression which promotes selfgovernment
=> not political expression. Film is not protected |
|
|
Joseph Burstyn, Inc., v. Wilson (1952)
|
OVERTURNS Mutual Film. Film protected by 1st Amendment.
But the U.S. Constitution does not provide absolute freedom to show all films of every kind at all times and in all places. Time, place and manner regulation OK |
|
|
Rationale for Regulation => Interstate Commerce, of broadcasting
|
Limited number of airwaves
Signal power Transmission distance Airwaves belong to the people Broadcasters must obtain a license to use them from the government AND must do so in the public interest, convenience, and necessity. Because it cannot be determined by the broadcaster himself, the FCC is the “guardian of that interest.” The facts of each case will govern a definition of the “public interest.” |
|
|
Statutes and Regulatory Agencies
|
The Radio Act of 1912 — The Secretary of Commerce (& Labor)
The Radio Act of 1927 — The Federal Radio Commission The Telecommunications Act of 1996 => de-regulation The Communications Act of 1934 — The Federal Communications Commission |
|
|
The Radio Act of 1912
|
The Secretary of Commerce (& Labor) has power to license airwaves
|
|
|
The Radio Act of 1927
|
The Federal Radio Commission-gives power to take lisences back as a result of U.S vs Zenith
sets up Federal Radio Commission, administrative agencies, same power as secretary. |
|
|
The Telecommunications Act of 1996
|
de regulation of media
|
|
|
U.S. v. Zenith Radio (1926)
|
The Radio Act of 1912 directed the Secretary of Commerce to
issue licenses to U.S. citizens “upon application therefor.” However, Congress did not provide the Secretary with any grounds to reject applications. His powers were therefore unconstitutionally broad. Because of this, even though WJAZ (Chicago) broadcast at times and on frequencies not authorized, Zenith Corp. could not be penalized. The FRC’s chain broadcasting regulations simply represent a particular conception of how broadcasters should act in the public interest. Broadcasters’ 1st Amendment rights are not violated by the regulations, because “radio inherently is not available to all |
|
|
NBC v. U.S. (1943)
|
The problem of chain broadcasting => networks
3.3.3.4.2. The FRC’s chain broadcasting regulations simply represent a particular conception of how broadcasters should act in the public interest. Broadcasters’ 1st Amendment rights are not violated by the regulations, because “radio inherently is not available to all.” NBC doesn't have a right to buy more stations. U.S wins |
|
|
Communications Act of 1934
|
FRC becomes FCC because of anticipation of television
Section 1 – authorizes regulation of interstate commerce by Wire Radio Section 301 – Licenses granted by federal authority Section 303 – regulations to be enacted Not inconsistent with the law As the FCC deems necessary As the public convenience, interest and necessity requires |
|
|
FECUA v. WDAY (1959)
|
Section 326 — prohibition against censorship
Section 315 — The Equal Opportunity Rule => allows purchase of time by a “legally qualified candidate for public office” Publicly announced Qualified under law Lowest unit rate => not free Treated same as most favored commercial advertiser Except a bona fide newscast or news interview Except bona fide news documentary Except on-the-spot coverage of bona fide news events Exception summary: newsworthiness The problem A totally uncensored political speech . The consequence: a defamation lawsuit Conflicting statutory provisions Result: implied immunity-if u make us do it we are not held accountable |
|
|
Zapple Doctrine
|
Quasi-Equal Opportunity Doctrine
FCC rule combining elements of Equal Opportunity Rule and Fairness Doctrine When a station sells time to supporters of a candidate, broadcasters must afford comparable time to supporters of opponent Does not apply to all parties and all candidates, as does Equal Opportunity Rule => broadcaster’s choice Does not apply outside campaign periods |
|
|
Cable Television history
|
History => CATV and importation of distant signals
Is Cable a print medium or a broadcast medium? The format distinction The process distinction The “Duck Test” => walks, Statutory Authority Communications Act of 1934 => ? Cable Television Act of 1984 Cable Television Consumer Protection & Competition Act of 1992 Including, the “Must Carry” Rule Telecommunications Act of 1996 |
|
|
U.S. v. Southwestern Cable (1968)
|
Retransmission of L.A. television signals to San Diego
The FCC has the power to regulate that which is “reasonably ancillary to the effective performance of the Commission’s various responsibilities for the regulation of television broadcasting.” Does FCC have power to regulate cable same way as broadcast? Format argument=look the same process=different ruled in favor of us bc FCC has power to regulate by wire and airwaves Section 2 applies to all communication “by wire or radio.” |
|
|
Los Angeles v. Preferred Communications (1986)
|
Cable is protected by
the 1st Amendment under requirements of intermediate scrutiny NO more exclusive franchises NO set time limit on franchises NO requirement that would-be cable suppliers provide public access channels, etc. The Future Problem of Scarcity – does “scarcity” exist for cable television? Technological scarcity, based on engineering limitations Economic scarcity, based on the argument that cable is a “natural monopoly” and communities can only support one operator |
|
|
Turner Broadcasting v. FCC (1997)
|
The Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act
of 1992 — The “Must Carry” Rule Preserves the benefits of free, over-the-air local broadcast stations => cable systems have bottle-neck control over most programming delivered Promotes the widespread dissemination of information from a multiplicity of sources Promotes fair competition in the market for television production “Must Carry” Requirements Local cable systems must carry (re-transmit) any local broadcast station’s signal they are asked to carry and they must do so free of charge Local cable systems may carry (re-transmit) any local broadcast station’s signal they wish to carry but they must pay royalties to be able to do so FCC wins |
|
|
Clustering
|
the acquisition of as many cable systems in a given
market as possible, giving multiple system operators centralized control over more local markets |
|
|
Television/Cable’s Future
|
The Telecommunications Act of 1996
|
|
|
The Telecommunications Act of 1996
|
No numerical cap on radio/TV ownership => no more 7-7-7 or 12-
12-12 rule License term limit extended to 8 years “Must Carry” Rule also included in Telecomm Act Cable subscription rates deregulated V-Chip required => Program labels set by industry New, hybrid cable system/telephone system => “open video system” Cable systems to provide local telephone service Scrambling of indecent programming |
|
|
U.S. v. Playboy Entertainment (1999)
|
Statutory provisions of Communication Decency Act of
1996 to prevent “signal bleed” of scrambled/blocked signal => “time channeling” cannot force playboy to take off cable supreme court ruled in favor of playboy |
|
|
AT&T v. Iowa Utilities Board (1999)
|
Media convergence-who is in charge
At&T/FCC wins FCC can regulate telecom services nationally |
|
|
Internet — Reno v. ACLU (1997)
|
Does the medium need regulation to expand? No medium is an island and
certain communication issues are universal: privacy, copyrights, fraud, defamation, pornography, advertising/commercialism, antitrust and parental prerogatives over what comes into homes Communications Decency Act of 1996 prohibits The “knowing” transmission of “obscene or indecent” messages to those under 18 The “knowing” sending/displaying in a “patently offensive” manner depictions/descriptions of sexual/excretory organs or activities Conclusion: The Internet differs from broadcasting. The history of extensive government regulation of broadcasting . The scarcity of available frequencies at broadcasting’s inception What about “zoning” the Internet? “Net neutrality” => no form of Internet content should be preferred over any other => no faster routing of some content over other content for higher charges => no “restricted, fast lanes” on the Internet |
|
|
National Cable & Telecommunications Association v. Brand X
Internet Services (2005) |
Internet access can be through either:
Telecommunications service, such as, DSL modem (which is FCC-regulated) Information service, such as, cable modem (which is not FCC-regulated) Can FCC reclassify all broadband Internet service from its current designation as an “information service” to a “telecommunications service” to guarantee “net neutrality”? |
