MEDIA LAW TEST 2

MTSU Roger Heinrich

False Light

Making a person seem to be someone they are not: lying. Misattribution of actions/beliefs 

False Light vs. Libel

Libel-Plantiff needs to show injury

False light- Plantiff does not need to show injury

Using Other’s Likeness in Ads is…

Appropration. Using someone’s name, voice, identity,  or likeness without consent, especially if likeness is being used for commercial use

Intrusion

Physically or technologically disturbing your reasonable expectation of privacy 

Actual Malice

Whoever libeled this person KNEW it was false; a reckless disregard of the truth. Non-famous people do not need to prove actual malice

FOIA

Freedom of Information Act, est 1966. A federal law that gives any person the right to request access to records from federal executive branch agencies

Food Lion V Capital Cities/ABC

After hearing rumors about unsanitary practices in Food Lion delis, journalists from ABC got themselves hired as employees and recorded everything, proving that the rumors were true. Food Lion sued. Journalists misrepresented themselves as worthy employees, so foodlion won on that front, but were unable to sue for libel as the things ABC reported were true.

Qualified Privilege

A legal defense in defamation cases. It provides conditional immunity for false and harmful statements made in good faith where the speaker has a legal, moral, or social duty to speak, and the listener has a corresponding interest in hearing it

Cohen V Crowles Media

Cohen was managing a political campaign. He had dirt on the opposing candidate, and gave it to news outlets. He made them promise to name him under anonymity, and they all named him. He sued and won a bunch of money because of Promissory estoppel 

Sheppard v Maxwell

Sheppard’s wife is murdered, Sheppard alleges that his wife was killed by a masked assailant who got away.  The media was heavily involved in the trial, including the police doing interviews the day of the trial. He was found guilty, and served time. Years later, it was determined that not only did he not get a fair trial, but he was also not guilty.

Richmond v Virginia

After a series of mistrials in a murder case in the state of Virginia, a trial judge closed the trial to the public and the media. Two reporters of Richmond Newspapers, Inc. challenged the judge's action. The Court held that the First Amendment encompassed not only the right to speak but also the freedom to listen and to receive information and ideas, so the press had the right to be there

Branzburg v Hayes

After observing and interviewing a number of people synthesizing and using drugs in a two-county area in Kentucky, Branzburg, a reporter, wrote a story which appeared in a Louisville newspaper. On two occasions he was called to testify before state grand juries which were investigating drug crimes. Branzburg refused to testify and potentially disclose the identities of his confidential sources. The Court held that requiring reporters to testify before a grand jury does not violate freedom of press or speech when the topic is something of compelling intrest to the government

Cameras in the Courtroom

Access in circuit, appellate, and state courts. Judges may impose restrictions to recordings. Familiarity with state laws; different states regulate different rules for recording 

Shield Laws

Prevents specific groups from being forced to disclose confidential information or face legal penalties from other jurisdictions. Most commonly used to allow journalists to refuse to testify or reveal confidential sources and unpublished materials in court or before grand juries

Vior Dire

Potential jurors are asked questions to determine if they can be put on the jury - Public should be able to sit and listen to the Voir Dire process 

Estes v. Texas

Estes was friends with Lendon B. Johnson. Estes made a nefarious deal with someone for some oil in tanks in Texas. He was caught, and the media was heavily involved in the case because he knew Johnson. Estes was found guilty, but because the media was so involved, it was determined that Estes did not get a fair trial and the charges were dropped.

What Happened Following Sheppard v Maxwell?

• Selecting jurors got more careful

• Judges were better about instructing the jury about how to act regarding the trial 

• The jury members started being sequestered if necessary; no outside contact, but in a hotel room, no access to social media, etc. so that they will not be swayed. (happens state by state, only rarely used on heavily media covered cases)

• Relocating the Trial; If there is too much coverage of a case in the area where the event happened, they will move the trial to a different place to give a fair trial 

• Delaying the trial to wait until press dies down

• Making jurors anonymous so that press can’t reach out to them for comment

• Limiting speech outside of court; jury can’t openly speak about case 

Promissory estoppel 

If something is promised to you and not delivered, you can sue

Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart

Farmhand murders almost an entire family, got wide press coverage. The judge, Stuart, gets spooked by the high press coverage and closes the trial. Nebraska Press Association sues the court to open the trial. The court ruled in Press’s favor, saying that Stuart had no valid reason to close the trial and that the farmhand would have gotten a fair trial regardless. 

Gag Order

Judge determines that if the trial is public, the defendant will not get a fair trial. Therefore, a gag order is put into place to prevent media coverage of the trail as it’s going on

Bartnicki vs. Vopper

Head of a teachers strike union was speaking to other teachers about how the strike might end in violence. A third party was recording the phone call and gave the info to news outlets. People speaking wanted to sue the news station for airing the phone call. The courts ruled against it because if violence happened, it would have been a crime, so the airing prevented crime. 

Sunshine Laws

The public is allowed to ask for info from state meetings, government documents, etc. Openness of info depends on the state. If into is of importance to national security, they typically are not open

Anti-SLAPP Laws

Can’t sue anyone for saying anything you don’t agree with. 29 states have them, and some states have more robust laws than others

Section 230 Immunity

Protects website operators and internet service providers from being responsible for libelous media on their sites

Retractions

Taking back your statement and giving compensation to the plantiff in order to avoid court

Summary Judgment

What defendant has to give plaintiff if they lose the case

Single Publication Rule

Limits a plaintiff to a single cause of action for a mass-distributed work. The statute of limitations begins on the date of the first general publication, regardless of how many copies, editions, or online views occur later

Privacy Act

est 1974, Federal law governing how executive branch agencies collect, maintain, use, and share personally identifiable information (PII) stored in "systems of records". It restricts unauthorized disclosures and grants individuals rights to view and correct their own records

Administrative Procedure Act of 1946

governs how federal administrative agencies propose and issue regulations, conduct adjudications, and submit to judicial review