bodkin ch1-4: exam 1

What is the best prevention against potential misconduct for professionals involved with communication and media law issues?

A strong understanding of media law

Communication spreads instantly and globally meaning

a single post can reach millions in seconds

What are Defamation risks?

False statements can go viral, exposing communicators to lawsuits.

What are Ethical Lapses?

Misleading or unethical content (ads, PR stunts) can ruin reputations overnight.

What is copyright confusion?

Using unlicensed images, music, or text is common, but copyright confusion occurs when people misunderstand what content is legally protected and how it may be used.

What is law that it prevents moral wrongs?

Law sets the minimum standard for acceptable behavior

What does ethics provide before law is applied?

Ethical choices often prevent lawsuits

Combined Function: What is the combined function of law and ethics?

Law and ethics combined Together form a dual system for responsible communication

example: truthful transparent advertising

What does “No separate body of PR or journalism law” mean?

The same legal risks apply across communication fields

What is Citizen Journalism?

Anyone with a phone can publish globally blurring professional boundaries

What are shared legal risks in media?

Defamation copyright privacy and free speech affect all media professionals

What do strong internal codes provide?

Proactive protection, preventing it before it happens

What do codes of ethics clarify?

Expected conduct and reduce liability

What is the risk of weak or unclear communication?

higher costs; leads to lawsuits (direct), damaged trust, or crises (indirect)

What does ethical writing do?

Precision and honesty reduce both legal exposure and reputational harm

What are the facts of US v. Microsoft (2001)?

Microsoft faced antitrust charges for monopolistic practices. Internal emails by Bill Gates contradicted his testimony.

What is the issue in US v. Microsoft (2001)?

Can corporate communications (emails, memos) be used as evidence with the same weight as testimony?

What is the rule in US v. Microsoft (2001)?

Written communications are admissible in court and carry evidentiary weight equal to oral testimony.

What is the application in US v. Microsoft (2001)?

Gates’ emails undermined his credibility, illustrating risks of casual written communication.

What is the conclusion in US v. Microsoft (2001)?

Microsoft got in trouble for antitrust issues, and their careless internal emails caused legal problems (settled with DOJ).

What is the court progression in US v. Microsoft (2001)?

District Court: Microsoft violated antitrust law and was ordered to break up.

Appeals Court: Cancelled the breakup but confirmed monopoly violations and sent it back for fixes.

Supreme Court: Didn’t review, so the appeals court ruling stayed.

What was the court makeup in 2001 for US v. Microsoft?

D.C. Circuit judges leaned center-right, were skeptical of regulation, but still enforced key antitrust rules.

What is a subpoena?

A court order to appear or produce evidence

What happens if you fail to comply with a subpoena?

You can get fines or be held in contempt of court

What types of communication can be subpoenaed?

Emails, texts, memos, proposals, and handwritten notes

What did the Microsoft case show about internal emails?

Internal emails can be very damaging in court

What is a good rule of thumb for written communication?

Don’t put in writing what you wouldn’t want read aloud in court

What is communication in terms of persuasion?

Communication is persuasion

What does persuasion aim to do?

It seeks to move audiences by

Information: changing what they know

Attitude: how they feel

Behavior: and what they do

What does ethical persuasion ask?

Where does loyalty lie — client, public, or truth?

What are attitudes?

Broad, enduring evaluations (e.g., “I value sustainability”)

What are opinions?

Specific verbal expressions of attitudes (e.g., “Plastic bags should be banned”)

What are behaviors?

Observable actions guided by attitudes or opinions (e.g., “I bring reusable bags to the store”)

What does law depend on?

Facts, because courts must determine truth

What is deductive logic?

General truth applied to a specific case (guaranteed)

What is inductive logic?

Specific examples used to draw a broader conclusion (probable)

Truth is often contested requiring what?

Truth is often contested, requiring evidence and interpretation

Why are truth and transparency important?

They are essential for ethical communication

What must ethical communicators avoid?

Fallacies (false or mistaken idea, belief, or argument that seems plausible but relies on invalid reasoning, inaccurate facts, or deceptive language to mislead or persuade, often by appearing logical when it's flawed)

What are the facts of NYT v. US (1971)?

Pentagon Papers

NYT and Washington Post obtained a classified Department of Defense (DoD) study on the Vietnam War. The government tried to block publication.

What is the issue in NYT v. US (1971)?

Does the First Amendment allow prior restraint of the press to stop publication of classified material for national security reasons?

What is the rule in NYT v. US (1971)?

Prior restraint is presumptively unconstitutional; only direct, immediate threats justify it.

What is the application in NYT v. US (1971)?

Pentagon Papers

The government failed to show an immediate threat beyond embarrassment

What is the conclusion in NYT v. US (1971)?

Pentagon Papers

6 majority –3 dissent for the newspapers; publication was allowed; prior restraint was nearly barred

What is the significance of NYT v. US (1971)?

It affirmed freedom of the press as a check on government power.

What precedent did NYT v. US (1971) set?

Prior restraint is almost never justified.

What tension remains after NYT v. US (1971)?

Freedom of the press versus national security concerns.

What does law do?

It sets minimum standards and is enforced by courts

What do ethics do?

They set aspirational standards rooted in fairness, integrity, and compassion

What is the key difference between law and ethics?

Where law stops, ethics begins

What is an example of law versus ethics?

A controversial ad may be legal but ethically questionable

What happened in the Enron case?

Fraudulent accounting led to company collapse

What happened in the Beechnut case?

Fake “apple juice” led to lawsuits and lost trust

What happened in the Walmart case?

Labor and wage controversies led to reputation challenges

What happened in the Starbucks case?

Aggressive expansion led to local backlash

What happened in the Nike case?

Sweatshop labor led to global criticism

What often comes before legal violations?

Unethical conduct

What must communicators do to prevent misconduct?

Spot warning signs early

What is the key takeaway from misconduct cases?

Strong ethics are the best prevention

What role should communicators play when advising organizations facing ethically questionable decisions?

They should balance loyalty to clients with public trust

What are communicators beyond message delivery?

They are strategic advisors

What did cases like Enron, Nike, and Wal-Mart show?

Professionals often saw warning signs early, and failure to speak up led to reputational collapse

What does communicator credibility depend on?

Ethical foresight, such as asking whether actions could damage trust if exposed

What does the Nike sweatshop example show?

The practices were legal under international contracts but ethically indefensible and caused massive backlash

What is the key takeaway for communicators?

Ethical foresight prevents crises and long-term credibility matters more than short-term gain

Why is spin ineffective after unethical acts become public?

Because once exposed, the only real protection is having acted ethically from the beginning

What are sunshine laws?

Laws that require open government meetings and documents

What is the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)?

A 1966 law giving the public the right to access federal records

What is the main debate around transparency?

Transparency versus confidentiality

What is reporter’s privilege?

A claimed right of journalists to refuse to reveal sources

Why do journalists promise confidentiality to sources?

To encourage sources to share information

Where was reporter’s privilege tested?

Branzburg v. Hayes (1972)

What are the facts of Branzburg v. Hayes (1972)?

Reporters in Kentucky and Massachusetts refused to testify before grand juries about confidential sources

What is the issue in Branzburg v. Hayes (1972)?

Does the First Amendment give journalists a privilege to refuse testimony?

What is the rule in Branzburg v. Hayes (1972)?

There is no absolute reporter’s privilege under the First Amendment

What did the majority hold in Branzburg v. Hayes (1972)?

All citizens have a duty to testify and law enforcement’s needs prevail

Who joined the majority opinion in Branzburg v. Hayes (1972)?

White, Burger, Blackmun, Rehnquist, and Powell

What was Justice Powell’s concurrence?

A narrow balancing test with case-by-case discretion later cited by lower courts

What was Justice Stewart’s dissent?

A proposed three-part test requiring relevance, no alternative means, and a compelling interest

Who joined Justice Stewart’s dissent?

Brennan and Marshall

What was Justice Douglas’s dissent?

Advocated stronger protection and a near-absolute reporter’s privilege

What is the conclusion of Branzburg v. Hayes (1972)?

The Court ruled 5–4 against an absolute reporter’s privilege

Why is Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) important?

The dissents and Powell’s concurrence became the foundation for later shield laws

What was the court progression in Branzburg v. Hayes?

Trial courts in Kentucky and Massachusetts ordered testimony.
Appeals courts generally upheld the orders.
The Supreme Court in 1972 ruled there is no absolute privilege.

What was the vote breakdown in Branzburg v. Hayes (1972)?

Majority (5): White, Burger, Blackmun, Rehnquist, Powell.
Dissent (4): Stewart, Brennan, Marshall, Douglas.

What was the ideological makeup of the Court in Branzburg v. Hayes (1972)?

Majority included conservative justices with Powell as a moderate swing vote.
Dissent consisted of moderate liberal and liberal justices.

What happened after Branzburg v. Hayes?

States responded by passing laws to protect journalists

How many states have shield laws today?

More than 30 states plus Washington D.C.

Are shield law protections absolute?

No, they are usually qualified, not absolute

What is the key takeaway about shield laws?

Protections differ by state and there is no national shield law

Should journalists have absolute privilege to protect sources, or should courts compel testimony?

The Court rejected absolute privilege

What approach did the majority support?

Courts may compel testimony

What did Justice Powell’s concurrence propose?

Case-by-case balancing

What did Justice Stewart’s dissent propose?

A three-part test requiring relevance, no alternative means, and a compelling interest

How did Stewart’s dissent influence later law?

It shaped many state shield laws

What is the key takeaway from this debate?

There is no federal reporter’s privilege, but the dissent influenced real-world law

Rule 1 of Ten Important Things About the Law – Law shows what you don’t know

Know when to consult a lawyer

Rule 2 of Ten Important Things About the Law – Legal literacy

Provides protection and prevents being misled by myths

Rule 3 of Ten Important Things About the Law – Spotting legal landmines

Identify defamation, privacy, and other risks early

Rule 4 of Ten Important Things About the Law – Avoid court

Litigation is costly; preventive practices are cheaper