Bartnicki V. Vopper Case Study

In what was just supposed to be a collective-bargaining for new teacher contracts, the violations of a cellular conversation prompted a historical court case, Bartnicki V. Vopper. Gloria Bartnicki occupied the positon of chief union negotiator for District Teachers Union. In a disputable cellular conversation between Bartnicki and the union president, Anthony Kane, an unidentified person intercepted the call and recorded the conversation. The unidentified person then gave the recording to Jack Yokum, who was the president Wyoming Valley West Tax Payers’ Association. Yokum’s job was to disapprove of any actions for the new teacher’s contract. Yokum gave the recording to a local radio host, Frederick Vopper. Vopper played segments of the recorded conversation over the air.
An agreement for the negotiation, in favorable of Bartnicki, was already decided upon before the airing of the conversation. Bartnicki was unaware that her conversation was recorded, …show more content…
Are citizens guaranteed protection, for unlawful publications of their speech? Should a reporter give up their source, if the information they disclose is illegal? Do you punish one who is unknowing of such a crime? These are questions, answered by the case of Bartnicki V. Vopper that will help for future rulings in similar court cases. Because of the ruling of Bartnicki V. Vopper. Government and non-government officials aren’t able to wiretap your conversations illegally. Reporters should be careful when it comes to how they obtain information and deciding to play it over the air waves.
Bartnicki V. Vopper is in fact essential to media law. Reporter’s Privilege is crucial for different forms of reporters. Reporter’s Privilege is when a reporter lawfully has the right to keep his sources confidential. Even though Vopper didn’t have to disclose his source, he should have been aware of the consequences when dealing with outside sources and obtaining suspicious