CHAPTER ESSENTIALS

• In the United States, freedom of speech and freedom of the press are protected by the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights. However, Americans have long debated what constitutes “free expression.” Around the globe, four different interpretations of free expression have emerged: the authoritarian model (which tolerates little criticism of government or public dissent), the state model (in which the government controls the press), the social responsibility model (in which the press is privately owned and functions as a Fourth Estate—an unofficial branch of government that watches for abuses of power by the legislative, judicial, and executive branches), and the libertarian model (which encourages vigorous criticism of government and supports the highest degree of individual and press freedoms) (pp. 436–438).

• Though the First Amendment prohibits censorship, which is defined as prior restraint—meaning that courts and governments cannot block any publication or speech before it actually occurs—two pivotal court cases have tested this idea: the Pentagon Papers case and the Progressive magazine case (pp. 439–440).

• Some forms of expression are not protected under the Constitution. These forms include sedition, copyright infringement (a copyright legally protects the rights of the authors and producers to their published or unpublished writing, music, lyrics, TV programs, movies, or graphic art designs for a specified period of time, after which the work enters the public domain, allowing the public free access to the work), and libel— or defamation of someone’s character in written or broadcast form (which differs from slander, or spoken defamation). To win a libel case, public officials must prove falsehood, damages, negligence, and actual malice (meaning that a reporter or an editor knew the statement was false and printed it anyway, or acted with a reckless disregard for the truth). Defenses against libel include the truth and the rule of opinion and fair comment—the notion that opinions, unlike statements of factual information, are protected from libel. Other forms of expression not protected by the Constitution are obscenity, which people have had difficulty defining over the years, and violation of privacy rights (the right to privacy addresses a person’s right to be left alone, without personal information becoming public property) (pp. 440–443, 446–448).

• The First Amendment has clashed with the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees accused individuals the right to speedy and public trials by impartial juries. Gag orders (speech restrictions) and laws governing the use of cameras in the courtroom put restrictions on speech and other forms of expression for the sake of Sixth Amendment rights, whereas shield laws protect reporters from revealing confidential sources of information used in news stories (pp. 448–450).

• The advent of film presented new challenges for those seeking to determine whether expression in film should be protected. For the first half of the twentieth century, citizen groups and the Supreme Court failed to recognize movies as protected speech. The movie industry began regulating itself to safeguard its profits and avoid further government oversight (pp. 450–453).

• Because it uses the public airwaves, broadcasting receives fewer protections than film and print. Although the government cannot censor broadcast content, it may punish broadcasters after the fact for indecency or profanity. In addition, Section 315 of the Communications Act of 1934 mandates that during elections, broadcast stations must provide equal opportunities and response time for qualified political candidates. From 1949 to 1987, the Fairness Doctrine—an important corollary to Section 315—required stations to air programs about controversial issues affecting their communities and to provide competing points of view during the programs (pp. 453–456).

• Since the Internet is not regulated by the government, is not subject to the Communications Act of 1934, and has done little self-regulating, many consider it a true venue for free speech, though debates exist about what forms of expression should be allowed (p. 457).

• Questions about the First Amendment’s influence over freedom of expression in mass media are centered on democracy (p. 460).

• As journalism becomes compromised by the business of media, sites like WikiLeaks have become de facto watchdog groups, raising questions about the public’s right to know sensitive information (pp. 460–461).

1. Question 13.1

   What is the basic philosophical concept that underlies America’s notion of free expression?

2. Question 13.2

   How did both the Motion Picture Production Code and the current movie rating system come into being?

3. Question 13.3

   How does the Supreme Court view print and broadcasting as different forms of expression?

4. Question 13.4

   Why is the future of watchdog journalism in jeopardy?

• DESCRIBE the content of the files of each station, noting what activities have been in the public interest over several years. Share your descriptions with the group.

• ANALYZE the patterns in the public files. Do some stations contribute in a greater capacity than others?

• INTERPRET what these patterns mean. Do the activities constitute operations in “the public interest, convenience, or necessity”? Are these things the station would likely be doing anyway, or do the federal requirements compel it to do more extraordinary things?

• EVALUATE the stations’ commitment to the public interest. Do they do enough in the public interest to merit their broadcast license?

• ENGAGE with the community by writing to the stations to criticize or commend them on their commitment to public interest in your community. Make sure to send a copy to the FCC, since your letter will become part of the stations’ public record.