New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

Media Law and Ethics

by: Miss Pasquale Thiel

Media Law and Ethics MMC 3337

Miss Pasquale Thiel
GPA 3.72

Steve Stepanek

Almost Ready


These notes were just uploaded, and will be ready to view shortly.

Purchase these notes here, or revisit this page.

Either way, we'll remind you when they're ready :)

Preview These Notes for FREE

Get a free preview of these Notes, just enter your email below.

Unlock Preview
Unlock Preview

Preview these materials now for free

Why put in your email? Get access to more of this material and other relevant free materials for your school

View Preview

About this Document

Steve Stepanek
Class Notes
25 ?




Popular in Course

Popular in Mmc Multimedia Communications

This 20 page Class Notes was uploaded by Miss Pasquale Thiel on Monday October 12, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to MMC 3337 at Georgia Southern University taught by Steve Stepanek in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 35 views. For similar materials see /class/221988/mmc-3337-georgia-southern-university in Mmc Multimedia Communications at Georgia Southern University.

Similar to MMC 3337 at GSU

Popular in Mmc Multimedia Communications


Reviews for Media Law and Ethics


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 10/12/15
Contemporary 1 Amendment Problems Prior Resbaintanensorshlp WW Act of Government Suppnmion usually takes place prior to publication Prior restraint notdeemed asWip39 Speaksmum retains ability to mass ideas WSW mamabar WSWOI39W ammormmm u WMWW Kmmmlemrmam W20 WombatsWm WW39WWWW WmeW mmwmwm Contemporary 1st Amendment Problems Prior Resu39aintsCensorship cuth ofneus warm seen as I Gulf brn39essrestrmmg pooWard mm Daualofptmcfauntotaryetedm I mm H Predmof39hatemsed Papmbrmcakgem a Immunoasmmsam WMtaxaabnornmmbr Contemporary 1st Amendment Problems Prior Restraintsnsorship 01th Gommmtcarmn oafmnwm mmmmam attermtstaregwammmnemuw lawmlly39 ablainedmmam mesarmstodmrm I Contemporary 15 Amendment Problems Prior Restraints Major cases Near M 15mm 283 US 697 1931 Sugreeame Court struck down Minnesota law permitting of cials to t a malicious scandalous and Mammary paper as a public nuisance pursuant to shutting down its operation InSAdecisionmeldthatpapersmaynotbeoenmmdbdbm publication under emu cirwmstanoes National security Pentagon Papers To contmi obscenity W9 W Tocurbincitemenistoriotwrandmburgu W mrsdmm m 10 WW Contemporary 1 1t Amendment Problems Prior Restraints Major oases Near v Minnesota 283 US 697 1931 Nearuniversally regarded as standing for the proposition that every instance of prior restraint comes beforethecourtwith w heavy negative presumptionquot Contemporary 1st Amendment Problems Prior Restraints Major cases Amman Papers Vl mnes v as 1971 First instanoeoffederal gov ttrying to prevent major newspapeds from publishing secret documents deemed essential to national security gravity of issue prompted meteoric review Nixon administration argued that disclosure of material detailing the history spanning four presidean decisions which led to the nation ls current involvement in South Vietnam would endanger national security and compromise current foreign relations Newspapers countered that this was clear instance of material of vital interest to Americans and that the document classi cation system needed revision Contemporary 1st Amendment Problems Prior Reshaints Major cases MWWWYM In 15 1971 Wmm alosatmmmand WWW quot Natal unqua edmwmrm MWWaWW WKWW mwmmmwwmwm mmmmmm WMWthmmm WMWUHWW Wmmnmmmmmu WMWWW Contemporary 1st Amendment Problems Prior Restraints Major cases I 15 V W 1972M v 05 1980 Censoring former and current federal employees Involves employment contracts signed by employees in sensitive positions eg CIA agents that forbid them from publishing info learned while in that employ or to submit manuscripts for prepublication review Supreme Court Snepp upheld validity of contractual provisions despite the implications for the individuals speech liberties Contemporary 1st Amendment Problems Prior Restraints Major cases a 05 v Nammwmyeesmam Courtstrikesdownbanonfederalworkersreceiving payfor w ngar desorgMngspeedwesasove ybm vagueand violatlveofFirstAmendment Wmmmmbybannlngpaymentstolommnlong of dalswhospokeorwmonmattersnotdirecuytelatedtomeir of dalduties Law may mkesenseforpollcy set ng lewl of cials Lomnkingworkemcannotbemadehowaivemelr consututionalliha es HatchActMllowsmostfederalworkerstoworkinpolmcaI campaigns do political fundraising and hold positions in pollticalpartles solongastheyoon nethelractivltiesmmeir owntlme Contemporary 1st Amendment Problems Prior Restraints Basis for review Strict scrutiny court imposes when an imposition on a fundamental right is at issue Imposition must be to advance a compelling government interest intent Imposition must directly advance that interest ef cacy Imposition must be as limited as possible precision Government rarely prevails I Rational basis Georgia Code 406315 Headgear and eyeprotective devices for riders a No person shall operate or ride upon a motorcycle unless he or she is wearing protective headgear which complies with standards established by the commissioner of public safety Who said it u quotI think there is an individual right to bear arms but it39s subject to commonsense regulation Contemporary 1539 Amendment Problems I Hate Speech Misty v MW 315 US 568 1942 Fighting Wordsquot Doctrine Audioritiescan curbspeechthatcan beexpectedtopreduce immediate violent response under a breach of peace rationale RA V v Sit Paid 505 US 377 1992 I Hate speechquot cannot be banned based on content a Government cannot punish those who communicate messages of racial gender religious intolerancequot merely because those ideas are offensive and emotionally painful to targeted group Any law is unconstimtimal ifitsinglesoutemressionsof bias motivated hatred for special punishment Content based sanctions Has effect on campus speech codes Contemporary 15 Amendment Problems I Hate Speech TheSpeechAction Dichotomy uDespite RAKthereisstillnosupportforthe propositionthatanactofviolencewhichismotivated byhab39edbasedonmepersonaltraitsor draracteristicsispmtectedbyme rstmlendment Infamnhasbeenheldmatstatesmayimpose harsher penaltiesforviolentactsmotivated by hatred whensudr can beproven MWV WiscmsinSOB us 47 1993 Contemporary 15 Amendment Problems Flag Burning Held to be a constitutionally protected form of expression Texas v Jdmm 491 US 397 1989 Fundamental value at stake Freedomofexpression mustextendtothosewhose ideasorpoliticalactivitiesareodiwstonmstothers in the society Flag Protection Act of 1989 Held unconstimtional Wedsmtes v Bdrm 496 US 310 1990 Instigated a call for a constitutional amendment Contemporary 1539 Amendment Problems Literature Distribution Government Regulation Governments cannot restrict groups that wish to express controversial views by means of laws that singularly limit tl39ietimeorplacewherethesegroupscan assembleor engage in expressive activities public forum analysis Firstamendmentprotectstherighttodisb ibute aswellas publish information Lovey v Qty 2me 303 US 444 1938 a Time place and manner restrictions Regulations must be contentneutral Government may require all groups to get parade permits Governmentmaybeabletosetreasonablelimitsasmmere andwhengroupscan meeton publicproperty Contemporary 1st Amendment Problems Forum Analysis Courts have identified three kinds of public forums I39 Traditional public forum Public places that have been by long tradition devoted to assembly and speeches eg public parks a highest level of lst Amendment protection extended o rior restraint suspect Near 0 reasonable time place manner restrictions Designated public forum Places created by government for expressive activities among other thin 395 public library meeting room student newspaper sometimes a lst Amendment certainly applies but gov t has greater latitude in imposing time manner and place restrictions Public Prooertv that is not a public forum Prisons military installations concourses to airline ates although the terminal area itself may be something of a orum Contemporary 1st Amendment Problems Literature Distribution On Private Property No federal constitutional right to distribute literature at a privateshopping center even ifitrelatestoactivitiesof that center or a particular tenant W v Nara 424 US 5071976 IMayhavearightunderastateconstitution 9W Marmara Rabbhs 447 US 74 1980 Court wasfacedwith upholding property righsversusastate s righttoconsiructandapplyitsownoonstimiion Califomiasupremeoourtdeemedtonaveusedproperdioo39etion advancingthelibertyinterestsofitscitizemmtheproperty rightsofshoppingoenterowners Standsforproposltionmatastatehasbroadpowertoaeate gmaterrighmfwilsd zmmmmrm mmandates ownasoverly broad and vague as v New quotBeamWm mm 513 US 454 1995 I Might make sense for policysetting leyel of cials Lower ranking workers cannot be made to waive their constitutional liberties Hatdi Act Allows mostfederalworkastobeactivein political campaigns on their own time Contemporary 15 Amendment Problems Miscellaneous Issues Seizure of criminals royalties Supreme Court invalidated New York39s law allowing the state to con scate royalties received by convicted criminals for publishedbroadcast accounts of their crimes wanname Mew YakSIaleO ne Victims Board 502 US 105 1991 Socalled Son of Samquot law Imposed burden based on mge content State needed to show compelling interest


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

25 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."

Jennifer McGill UCSF Med School

"Selling my MCAT study guides and notes has been a great source of side revenue while I'm in school. Some months I'm making over $500! Plus, it makes me happy knowing that I'm helping future med students with their MCAT."

Jim McGreen Ohio University

"Knowing I can count on the Elite Notetaker in my class allows me to focus on what the professor is saying instead of just scribbling notes the whole time and falling behind."

Parker Thompson 500 Startups

"It's a great way for students to improve their educational experience and it seemed like a product that everybody wants, so all the people participating are winning."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.