Notes from 11/12: NOT IN THE BOOK
Notes from 11/12: NOT IN THE BOOK COM250
Popular in Freedom of Expression
Popular in Communication Studies
This 0 page Class Notes was uploaded by Nicole Dombey on Thursday November 12, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to COM250 at University of Miami taught by Samuel Terilli in Summer 2015. Since its upload, it has received 86 views. For similar materials see Freedom of Expression in Communication Studies at University of Miami.
Reviews for Notes from 11/12: NOT IN THE BOOK
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: 11/12/15
EXAM 3 November 12 2015 Purpose of advertising 0 O 0 To get you to buy something Speaker what do they have Motive Trying to get your money How is that different from presidential candidates Hillary Clinton Trump Sanders etc Want you to vote for them l motive Speech Motivated by a Commercial Purpose O 0000 0 Advertising Public Relations Product Placements Branding Trying to sell you something different from political speech Is it really different They are trying to sell you their image and platform What do we think of commerce and its speech 0 O O O O Tainted by a selfinterested purpose Tainted by history of falsehoods Exaggeration A lot in advertisements but we also have it in poHUcalspeech Ex defend spending tax policy Is it essential to selfgovernment Manipulative Contrary to pursuit of truth or social well being Trying to draw you in to buy something Is it really different from political speech 0 Have adv Consultants music for their campaign False political speech Sometimes political mistakes Those in power should NOT be deciding what is true and not true Need open political debate When it comes to money out of pockets to buy goods or services we are aware of that and it affects us at home Commercial v Political Speech Differences 0 Is one more important 0 1st Amend Hierarchy of speech Categorical Exceptions and Chaplinsky Categorical exceptions came to apply in advertisement 0 Trying to categorize it High v Low v No Value Categories 0 Relative impact of falsehoods motives behind the speech 0 Regulatory structures 0 Resilience of the speech o Is it really different Or is it a question of how we view regulations 0 Since advertisement has money at stake it can withstand great deal of government regulation because of pro t motive If you are a political candidate for minority group you re political speech doesn t have money or power not going to be as resilient Alexander Meiklejohn eg o What he is saying is that there will be false idea in order for people to get higher Have to tolerate a speech and if we allow government to say speech is too dangerous we are allowing government to control what we say Said political speech is at the core at rst Amendment 0 Framework for advertisement being released as quotcrapquot that does not need protection Democracy and selfgovernment Importance of an informed electorate 0 Flow of info And criticism No suppressionmanipulation by those in power CPD Test Rejected Who s to say what s dangerous or false 0 Emphasis on public need To serve society not individual speaker 0 Political speech as core 1st Amendment Value Political Social commentary ideas info Ethics of Comm Speech CS 1st Amend Speech 0 OO 1942 Entrepreneur of NY bought submarine and docked it and printed out pamphlets to advertise tours of the submarine Handbills for submarine tours in NYC City said he can t distribute this in city of NY 0 Political issues are ok not advertisement pamphlets Changes his handbills and wrote on one side a political scheme on NY regulation Sanitary code prohibited street distribution of purely commercial materials Police got him again Went up to SC 90 decision Dismissed it and said that NY can do it because advertisement has no 1st Amend Value 0 1964 It was an ad selling civil rights movement and MLK soliciting donations SC applied 1st Amend For defamation Never thought they were dealing with advertisement as opposed to news Rethinking the exclusion o 1973 Newspaper would sell plasticized ads Some ads would use nonneutral gender terms Adv Is a commercial activity and we CAN regulate it 0 You are advertising something illegal don t have 1st Amend Rights to do that Acts Legal in Other States 0 1975 He was manager of newspaper in Virginia and accepted ad for Planned Parenthood clinic in NY Abortions were legal in NY but not in Virginia 0 Running this ad for something illegal in Virginia 0 Even though it was legal in NY where services would be performed Arrested and ned Went up to SC they reversed decision 0 Its truthful useful information for people 0 One state does not get to state on another state and try to limit what they are going to allow Information Consumers Need 0 1976 A lot of places didn t have big drug store chain that would compete on price Would be smaller pharmacies and prices were a lot higher Virginia has law making it ILLEGAL to advertise prices for prescription drugs 0 quotDon t want people competing on price because it might injure the publicquot 0 SC said Virginia had law to protect old businesses in Virginia at expense of new competitors and consumers 0 There is 1st Amend Value 0 Form of advertising that must be allowed The Test Central Hudson Gas and Electric v PSC 1980 0 To conserve energy utilities prohibited from promoting use of electricity ads 0 Regulated electrical utiities Not allowed to run advertising promoting the use of electricity Why Didn t want to build power plants wanted to conserve electricity 0 Had ad campaign encouraging people to buy energy efficient public appliances The USSCT said NO cant run ads prohibited by regulation l unconstitutional Said its nonsense because they are encouraging those to buy effective products encouraging people to preserve energy 1 Adv Must be truthful and for legal activity 0 if the Ad is for something illegal or its false you do not get to put it go to jail Ads that are false has NO PROTECTION 2 Government interest in regulating must be substantial 0 Important interest not matter of life or death 0 In this case they do have interest in conservation of energy 3 Regulation must directly advance the asserted government interest 0 Conservation of energy does advance interest 0 Will REDUCE electrical consumption if no one can buy appliances 4 Regulations must be no more extensive than needed to achieve the asserted government interest 0 Here the court said why would we have this rule Prohibits ALL ads even those energy efficient NOW applies to ALL ads if they want to regulate it they have to pass this test Intermediate scrutiny Still not as protected as political speech General Corp Speech Rights 0 1978 Invalidates Mass Law prohibiting cops from advertising to in uence voters unless related to assets of the business Bank wanted to oppose referendum on increasing taxes 0 Mass Said NO can t advertise unless business is at stake 1st Amend Business have right to free speech 0 a lot of money behind it so much that they might swamp marketplace of ideas 0 1980 Wanted to put iers with the bills they were sending out Said NO PSC said you cant do that they come to you only because of regulated utility and therefore are captive audience 0 SC I they CAN do that o The wastebasket Must CS be Transactional 0 Issue advertising Public relations o Is it a question of motive Dangerous Inquiry Mixed motives o Sullivan Bellotti Cent Hudson Con Edision o 1983 Post office had rule against selling listing contraceptive ads 0 Any information on what was available Constituted commercial speech because of money behind it 0 Court said there is NO interest in regulating this USPS rule against unsolicited contraceptive ads materials were both informational and promotional SCT economic motivation made is cs Applied 4part test and rejected the USPC prohibition too broad Nike v Kasky o Slave and Child labor in southeast Asia In 90 s there were people criticizing Nike 0 Writing letters 0 Posting things in newspapers Nike was on receiving end of negative publicity They began buying ads and putting letters in saying we don t own those factories we only sign contracts with them 0 They send people there to inspect working conditions etc Kasky sued Nike over counterPR campaign saying it was false 0 Guy in California who hated Nike another critic Was afraid it was going to in uence other people 0 Wanted to make Nike publish ads saying what he wanted to say Not one publication mentioned sale of tshirt shoes etc Not designed to result in transaction Nike was responding to its critics 0 Trying to defend itself in free marketplace of ideas SC said where public relations stands under these tests 0 Sent case back to Calif To gure it out 0 Public relations campaign against Nike From Doonesbury to OpEds 0 Response by the Company Counter campaign ads letters No transactional Advs as part of Campaign 0 Suit it California for false advertising Not deceived into buying Nike products Dismissal of Cert by USSCT 0 Nike convinced Kasky to drop lawsuit and promoted working conditions in the world got them out of litigation Result to this day we don t know where PR stands closer to Political speech being protected or to ads not as protected Real World Regulation 0 State laws and local ordinances 0 Federal Regulatory Agencies FTC FDA FCC SEC 0 US Postal Service 0 0 Industry Regulation BBB Trade Groups 0 Private Litigation FTC Rules in General 0 Broad Regulatory Power false and deceptive advertising 0 What s deceptive 3 factors Reasonable consumer of the advertising Probability of deception Materiality of the deception in the buying decision 0 Puffery obviously hyperbole Veri able 0 Testimonials must be real actual user
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
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'