Media Law Test 2

Front 1

Appropriation

Back 1

Using a person’s name, picture, likeness, voice or identity for commercial or trade purposes without permission.

Front 2

Emotional Distress

Back 2

Serious mental anguish

Front 3

Intentional infliction of emotional distress

Back 3

Extreme and outrageous intentional or reckless conduct causing plaintiff severe emotional harm; public official and public figure plaintiff also must show actual malice on defendants part.

Front 4

Negligent infliction of emotional distress

Back 4

Owing a duty to a plaintiff, breaching that duty and causing the plaintiff severe emotional harm.

Front 5

Reckless

Back 5

Word used to describe actions taken with no consideration of the legal harms that might result.

Front 6

Tortuous newsgathering

Back 6

The use of reporting techniques that are wrongful and unlawful and for which the victim may obtain damages in court.

Front 7

Trespass

Back 7

Intrusion or entering private property without permission. Is both a crime and a tort.

Front 8

The case about the journalists who knocked on neighbors door and interviewed kids (

Back 8

• A news reporter interviewed three children living next door to a house where earlier in the day a mother had murdered her two children and then committed suicide herself. The children were too young to object to be interviewed and to know they could object too it. The news reporter basically forced his way into the home. The three children’s parents weren’t at home at the time of the interview, but essentially the family was able to win the suit under IIED.

Front 9

Nancy Grace case

Back 9

A woman named Duckett had done a taped interview with Nancy Grace about her missing son. Duckett later committed suicide before the phone taped interview was to be aired. Grace and CNN were sued for IIED

Front 10

Hustler v Falwell

Back 10

Hustler won. Because Falwell was a public figure and he could not prove that actual malice was done, since it was a satire in the magazine about him which is protected by the First Amendment. It was just a parody thus, Falwell could not sue successfully for IIED.

Front 11

Brandenburg v Hess

Back 11

The incitement test requires a plaintiff to show that the media defendant intentionally meant to cause harm (Intending to incite). In Bradenburg vs. Ohio, Bradenburg made a lot of negative comments about A.A’s and Jews and also threatened to to take avengeance against certain leaders. The Supreme court ruled in Bradenburg’s favor and said that would not punish advocacy unless it is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such an action. Hess was at an anti Vietnam War rally and said not directly to anyone but just out loud that the crowd should wait until a later time to take over a public street, he was arrested. The Supreme Court overturned his verdict saying that the First Amendment protected Hess’s comments because his words were not intended to, nor likely to provide an imminnet vilation of the law.

Front 12

Food Lion v Capital Cities

Back 12

Two news reporters went undercover and worked for Food Lion. News reporters basically used deception to achieve their news story. The reporters did trespass and breached loyalty of claims. It was a milestone the developing trend of plaintiffs veering away from libel claims. Food Lion sued not on libel but on the methods obtained by the reporters to get this story. Capital Cities Won.

Front 13

Bartnicki v Vopper

Back 13

A case about labor negotiations being recorded. The Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment allows the use a recording so long as the person who uses the recording is not the one who made it. The media was not liable for intercepting the cell phone conversation, punishing the information they obtained was not illegally (like wiretapping) so the journalist and the media are protected under the First Amendment.

Front 14

FOIA Requests

Back 14

The 1966 act that requires records held by federal government agencies to be made available to the public, provided that the information sought does not fall within one of nine exempted categories: Natural Security, Internal Agency Rules & Procedures, Statutory Exemptions, Trade Secrets, Agency Memos, Personal Privacy, Law Enforcement Records, Financial Records and Geological Data. So FOIA are not required to hand over any and every record. They can reject a request for information; it is the agency’s discretion.

Front 15

Reporter's privilege

Back 15

The concept that reporters can keep information such as source identity confidential. The idea is that the reporter source relationship is similar to doctor-patient and lawyer-client relationship. Another name for Reporter’s Privilege is Journalist privilege.

Front 16

Georgia shield law

Back 16

Georgia has a shield law that protects the identity of sources and unpublished information collected or prepared in the newsgathering process, such as notes and outtakes. The Georgia shield law covers people engaging in "the gathering and dissemination of news for the public. Georgia's shield law is broad -- it covers "any information, document, or item obtained or prepared in the gathering or dissemination of news." It extends to the identity of a source, information that would lead to the identity of a source, and unpublished information collected or prepared in the course of newsgathering. The protection applies whether or not you promise a source confidentiality.

Front 17

What US Amendment provides guarantees related to trials?

Back 17

6th.

Front 18

Continuance

Back 18

Postponement of trial to a later time.

Front 19

Sequestration

Back 19

The isolation of jurors to avoid prejudice from publicity in a sensational trial.

Front 20

Gag order

Back 20

A non-legal term used to describe court orders that prohibit publication or discussion of specific materials.

Front 21

Admonition

Back 21

Judges instructions to jurors warning them to avoid potentially prejudicial communications.

Front 22

Rationale of Supreme Court for regulating broadcasting?

Back 22

Broadcast media is more Pervasive and Spectrum Scarcity only so many channels are available.

Front 23

Red Lion Broadcasting vs. FCC

Back 23

The court upheld the FCC’s rule requiring that a radio station offer free time to an individual personally attacked by comments made on the station. The audience had the right to hear both sides of an issue. So the court ruled in favor of the FCC. (An example of the fairness doctrine.)

Front 24

Miami Herald v Maxwell

Back 24

They ruled in favor of the Miami Herald. We can’t tell newspapers what they have to publish.

Front 25

ACLU v Reno

Back 25

ACULA won.The court upheld the ban on obscene content sent over the internet. But the First Amendment does not protect obscene material on the Internet or in any medium.

Front 26

Pornography

Back 26

A vague, not legally precise term for sexually oriented material.

Front 27

Indecency

Back 27

A narrow legal term referring to sexual expression inappropriate for children on broadcast radio and television.

Front 28

Prurient

Back 28

Lustful thoughts or sexual desires

Front 29

Miller Test

Back 29

• The Miller Test: Used to find material as obscene the court must consider: (1) The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work taken as a whole appeals to prurient interests. (2) The work depicts or describes in a patently offensive way sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law and (3) The work taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. (A work must meet each part of the test to be classified as obscene).
• The Miller Test (simplified): The work must: (1) Arouse sexual lust. (2) Be hardcore pornography and (3) have no serious social value.

Front 30

What type of protection has Supreme Court granted to video games?

Back 30

Video games have First Amendment protection.