Contemplating Media & the First Amendment
Being a journalist means getting the story by doing whatever is necessary. Even if that means you are accepting information from people anonymously in order to get them to agree to give up that information. It makes since that some people want their name or face removed from a story, in order to make sure... Continue Reading →
As a student journalist, a lot goes through my head nowadays when I watch the news. There's an uprising of general distrust of what some call "the media". Viewers tend to identify the press as the media, which I don't understand. Media encompasses several fields; there isn't a giant, all-powerful group of publishers that make up a... Continue Reading →
Legally, lawyers are not forced to disclose incriminating information about their clients. This goes for doctors as well. These rights are granted to individuals with these careers so that the law does not interfere with their ability to carry out their job. One would think that journalists may be granted a similar right, so that... Continue Reading →
There is no federal shield law to protect reporters from divulging sources in court. For years the issue has been contested and overruled. Now, it is conducted on a case-by-case basis. Reading from a chapter in Garrett Epps' The First Amendment: Freedom of the Press, this idea is discussed further. In 1970, United States v.... Continue Reading →
According to Lewis in Freedom for the Thought That We Hate, “The interest of privacy was first authoritatively weighed against the First Ammendment’s guarantee of free expression by the Supreme Court in 1967, in the case of Time, Inc V. Hill. In summary, The Hills and their children were kept hostage in their home by... Continue Reading →
"The truth is the law can only do so much [...] it comes down to us. And to fundamentally changing the way we think about the Internet. Because too often you hear people play down the dangers of the internet saying, "well relax, its not real life" ,but it is. And it always has been."... Continue Reading →
Samuel D. Warren and Louis D. Brandeis once wrote in the Harvard Law Review of 1890, that, “ the common law, in its eternal youth, grows to meet the new demands of society.” They were asserting that when changes occur within our economical, political, and social structures, the law, in its nature, and with justice... Continue Reading →
It's amazing how cultures evolve, especially when looking at how society has viewed "obscenity". While freedictionary.com defines obscenity as, "the character or quality of being obscene; an act, utterance, or item tending to corrupt the public morals by its indecency or lewdness", it's broader than that. One of the first short films banned was "Carmencita" (1894),... Continue Reading →
In Chapter 5 of Freedom for the Thought That We Hate, author Anthony Lewis discusses the various issues Americans face when it comes to the intersection of freedom and privacy. Justices Louis D. Brandeis and Samuel D. Warren wrote “The Right to Privacy,” an article published in 1890 by the Harvard Law Review (pg. 68).... Continue Reading →
Do we have the right to be forgotten? John Oliver explores this query in a 2014 segment, following a ruling in the EU that allowed its citizens to request that Google and other search engines take down links to embarrassing content. In other words, European search engines must comply with “the right to be forgotten.”... Continue Reading →
Free Press Free Speech 