Chapter 16
Legal Controls and Freedom of Expression
In this chapter, we will:
• Examine free-expression issues, focusing on the implications of the First Amendment for a variety of
mass media
• Investigate the models of expression, the origins of free expression, and the First Amendment
• Examine the prohibition of censorship and how the First Amendment has been challenged and limited
throughout U.S. history
• Focus on the impact of gag orders, shield laws, the use of cameras in the courtroom, and some of the
clashes between the First Amendment and the Sixth Amendment
• Review the social and political pressures that gave rise to early censorship boards and the current film
ratings system
• Discuss First Amendment issues in broadcasting, considering why broadcasting has been treated
differently from print media
• Explore the newest frontier in free expression—the Internet
Preview Story: More than three-quarters of Americans think that corporations and wealthy individuals
have too much influence over elections. This influence is protected by the First Amendment as a form of
free expression.
I. The Origins of Free Expression and a Free Press
A. Models of Expression.
B. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
C. Censorship as Prior Restraint.
1. The Pentagon Papers Case.
2. The Progressive Magazine Case.
D. Unprotected Forms of Expression.
1. Seditious Expression.
2. Copyright Infringement.
3. Libel.
4. Defenses against Libel Charges.
5. Obscenity.
6. The Right to Privacy.
E. First Amendment versus Sixth Amendment.
1. Gag Orders and Shield Laws.
2. Cameras in the Courtroom.
II. Film and the First Amendment
A. Social and Political Pressure on the Movies.
B. Self-Regulation in the Movie Industry.
1. The Motion Picture Production Code.
2. The Miracle Case.
C. The MPAA Ratings System.
III. Expression in the Media: Print, Broadcast, and Online
A. The FCC Regulates Broadcasting.
B. Dirty Words, Indecent Speech, and Hefty Fines.
C. Political Broadcasts and Equal Opportunity.
D. The Demise of the Fairness Doctrine.
E. Communication Policy and the Internet.
IV. The First Amendment and Democracy
Media Literacy and the Critical Process: Who Knows the First Amendment?
Case Study: Is “Sexting” Pornography?
Examining Ethics: A Generation of Copyright Criminals?
LECTURE IDEAS
I. The Origins of Free Expression and a Free Press
• Discuss the origins of Western free expression, and consider the four models for expression and
speech: authoritarian, communist or state, libertarian, and social responsibility.
• We strongly recommend assigning the annual reports on press freedom prepared by Reporters
without Borders as external reading. The report “lists the worst violations in repressive countries,
including major culprits North Korea, Eritrea, Cuba and Turkmenistan, but also looks at
democracies, where progress needs to be made too.” The United States ranked forty-first in the
world in press freedom in 2015. Here are some of the highlights from the organization’s 2015
report:
• Many countries are using bans on blasphemy and sacrilege to silence political opposition to
the ruling party.
freedom-index-2015-decline-all-fronts.)
• In 2013, Reporters without Borders reported the following:
• Many countries involved in the “Arab Springs,” such as Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia, remain at
the bottom of the index because the political instability resulting from their regime changes
has created a dangerous environment for journalists.
• The United States ranked thirty-second, up from forty-seventh in the prior ranking.
• Reporters without Borders summed up 2013 this way: “The ranking of most countries is no
longer attributable to dramatic political developments. This year’s index is a better reflection
of the attitudes and intentions of governments towards media freedom in the medium or long
term.”
(See Reporters without Borders Press Freedom Index 2013: https://rsf.org/en/news/2013-world-
press-freedom-index-dashed-hopes-after-spring.)
• Another organization that tracks democracy and freedom, the United States–based Freedom House
(http://www.freedomhouse.org), also tracks press freedoms. Its 2015 report states:
The analysis found that less than 14 percent of the world’s inhabitants lived in countries
with a Free press, while 42 percent had a Partly Free press and 44 percent lived in Not
Free environments. The population figures are significantly affected by two countries—
China, with a Not Free status, and India, with a Partly Free status—that together account
for over a third of the world’s nearly seven billion people. The percentage of those
enjoying Free media in 2014 remained at the lowest level since 1996, when Freedom
House began incorporating population data into the findings of the survey.
(See Freedom House, Freedom of the Press 2015, at https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom–
press/freedom-press-2015#.VrixAbkrKiY.)
• It also may be helpful, during class, to visit the Freedom House Web site and show your students
the Global Trends graphics (https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press-2015/global-trends)
and refer to the Press Freedom map in the textbook (https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-
press-2015/press-freedom-maps).
• Explain the concept of censorship as prior restraint, especially as it relates to the Pentagon Papers
and the Progressive magazine cases.
• Officially launched in 2007, WikiLeaks refers to itself as a media organization and the whistle-
blowers who share information as their journalists. Here is its manifesto from its Web site
(http://wikileaks.org):
Our goal is to bring important news and information to the public. We provide an
innovative, secure and anonymous way for sources to leak information to our journalists
(our electronic drop box). One of our most important activities is to publish original
source material alongside our news stories so readers and historians alike can see
evidence of the truth. We are a young organisation that has grown very quickly, relying
on a network of dedicated volunteers around the globe.
• WikiLeaks has made worldwide headlines many times over since 2007 with its publication of
formerly secret documents from a number of governments and corporate entities around the world,
including hundreds of thousands of documents from the U.S. State Department and the U.S.
military. Most recently, some Democrats have blamed Hillary Clinton’s loss in the 2016
presidential election on revelations made by WikiLeaks from e-mails hacked from the account of a
key Clinton campaign official.
• The publishing of these documents has brought down much official wrath upon WikiLeaks and
its editor in chief, Julian Assange. Politicians ranging from Vice President Joe Biden to former
Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich have used words like “terrorist” and “traitor” to
define Assange and WikiLeaks (although how Assange, a citizen of Australia, could be a traitor to
the United States hasn’t ever really been explained).
• Assange himself was arrested in early December 2010 in Great Britain based on sexual assault
charges filed in Sweden by two women he allegedly met at a seminar. As extradition is contested in
the British courts, Assange and his supporters claim that the charges are politically motivated. They
also say that his greatest fear is extradition from Sweden to the United States, where he fears being
sent away to the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in Cuba.
• Although WikiLeaks does not reveal the names of its sources, an investigation by the U.S.
government resulted in May 2010 in the arrest of Pfc. Chelsea (previously Bradley) Manning, who
is accused of leaking U.S. diplomatic cables, U.S. military video, and field intelligence reports that
were published by WikiLeaks. He was convicted of several charges in August 2013.
• In June 2011, on the fortieth anniversary of the publishing of the Pentagon Papers in the press,
Daniel Ellsberg, the man who leaked the papers, defended Manning. The secrets that Ellsberg
revealed about the government lying to the public about the Vietnam War were much more highly
classified than the documents allegedly revealed by Manning, yet the charges against Ellsberg were
ultimately dismissed by a trial judge. Ellsberg said in a statement, “If Bradley Manning did what
he’s accused of, then he’s a hero of mine. . . . I wish I could say that our government has improved
its treatment of whistle-blowers in the 40 years since the Pentagon Papers.” (See Anna Mulrine,
“Pentagon Papers vs. WikiLeaks: Is Bradley Manning the New Daniel Ellsberg?” Christian Science
Monitor, June 13, 2011.)
• Outline the many unprotected forms of expression, including sedition, libel and slander, privacy,
and obscenity. Also note the court definitions of libel, privacy, and obscenity and relevant cases.
• An incredible series of overreactions in Oklahoma City in the summer of 1997 resulted in the local
police confiscating video copies of The Tin Drum, a German film that won the 1979 Academy
Award for best foreign film. Bob Anderson, the sixty-seven-year-old director of Oklahomans for
Children and Families, heard a radio talk-show host attacking The Tin Drum as an “obscene” film.
Anderson immediately called the Oklahoma City police, who then took a copy of the film to a local
district-court judge. The judge watched the film and (in what he later said was only an advisory
opinion) deemed it obscene. The police—with no warrants—then went to Oklahoma City video
stores and libraries and rounded up all copies. One Blockbuster Video store employee even
provided the names of the two customers who had checked out copies. Again without warrants,
police went to these two homes and demanded the return of the videocassettes of the nearly twenty-
year-old movie.
• The American Civil Liberties Union filed a suit against Blockbuster for revealing the names of
video renters. Blockbuster had a national policy of not supplying customers’ names, so the video
company was upset about the matter, too. The Tin Drum is an anti-Nazi film, adapted from the
Günter Grass novel of the same name. Its apparently objectionable sexual scenes involve teenage
II. Film and the First Amendment
• Discuss the history of film with regard to the First Amendment. Play excerpts of films such as The
Miracle, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, Gremlins, and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom to
illustrate legal and ratings issues.
• One of the first films to be targeted by MPAA head Will Hays was Howard Hawks’s Scarface in
1931. The PBS Culture Shock series Web site describes the story behind the movie (see
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/cultureshock/flashpoints/theater/hollywood.html):
In 1931, director Howard Hawks’ Scarface, the first movie in which a gangster uses a
machine gun, attracts the attention of Will Hays. Hired by studio heads in 1922 to fend off
charges of industry immorality, Hays has developed the Motion Picture Production Code,
later known as the Hays Code. The code aims to sanitize movies—no nudity, suggestive
dancing, miscegenation, ridicule of religion, illegal drug use, or “objectionable” language—
and it also demands unsympathetic portrayals of criminals and minimal detail when brutal
crimes are shown. Scarface offends Hays on almost every count, and the ensuing struggle
over the film is characteristic of the role of the Code in Hollywood production.
Director Hawks refuses to alter Scarface in response to Hays’s demands, but producer
• The Motion Picture Production Code: The following is taken from the 1927 “Don’ts and Be
Carefuls” list that became part of the self-regulatory code adopted by 95 percent of the movie industry:
• “Don’ts: Pointed profanity (including the words “God,” “Lord,” “Jesus,” and “Christ”), ridicule
of the clergy, children’s sex organs, any licentious or suggestive nudity, any inference of sex
perversion, white slavery, sex hygiene and venereal diseases, interracial sexual relations, scenes of
actual childbirth, and the illegal traffic of drugs.”
• “Be Carefuls: Prostitution, first-night scenes, man and woman in bed together, deliberate
seduction of girls, the institution of marriage, excessive or lustful kissing, brutality and possible
gruesomeness, actual hangings or electrocutions as legal punishment for crime, apparent cruelty to
children and animals, branding of people and animals, surgical operations, sympathy for criminals,
the use of firearms, theft, robbery, safecracking, and dynamiting of trains, mines, buildings, etc.
DVD: Clerks (1994), American Pie (1999), Boys Don’t Cry (1999), Happiness (1999), South Park:
Bigger, Longer & Uncut (1999), Requiem for a Dream (2000), Zack and Miri Make a Porno
(2008), Bruno (2009), The Evil Dead (2013), and The Wolf of Wall Street (2013).
III. Expression in the Media: Print, Broadcast, and Online
• The Federal Communications Commission is directed by five commissioners appointed by the
president and confirmed by the Senate for five-year terms, except when filling an unexpired term. The
president designates one of the commissioners to serve as chairperson. Only three commissioners
may be members of the same political party. None of them can have a financial interest in any
commission-related business. In one of the most controversial FCC appointments, President George
W. Bush designated an existing Republican member of the FCC, Michael K. Powell (son of Colin
Powell), as chair in 2001. During his four-year tenure, Powell advocated a philosophy of
communications deregulation that undoubtedly favored various media industries, which benefited
from deregulation.
• The FCC regulates broadcast content on radio (AM and FM) and “over-the-air” television (VHF and
UHF). The FCC Web site overview of Program Content Regulations
(https://www.fcc.gov/media/program-content-regulations) offers an easy-to-understand overview of
broadcast regulation in the form of frequently asked questions (e.g., “Does the FCC regulate the
content of cable programming?” and “ How have obscenity and indecency been defined?”).
• Indecency complaints to the FCC hit record numbers in 2004, a year that kicked off with the brief
flash of Janet Jackson’s breast in the Super Bowl halftime show. Indecency fines levied by the FCC
also hit record heights.
• Complaints soared to more than 1.1 million in 2004, from 240,000 in 2003, about 14,000 in 2002,
and just 350 in 2001. Appearing before Congress in February 2004, FCC chair Michael Powell said
the complaints registered “a dramatic rise in public concern and outrage about what is being broadcast
into their homes.”
• According to a report by Mediaweek published December 6, 2004, nearly all the complaints
emerged from a single conservative organization:
According to a new FCC estimate obtained by Mediaweek, nearly all indecency complaints
in 2003—99.8 percent—were filed by the Parents Television Council (PTC), a conservative
activist group. In 2004, almost all of the more than one million indecency complaints—aside
from those concerning the Janet Jackson “wardrobe malfunction” during the Super Bowl
halftime show broadcast on CBS—were brought by the PTC, according to an FCC analysis.
(The Super Bowl broadcast accounted for over 540,000 complaints, according to
commissioners’ statements.)
The prominent role played by the PTC has raised concerns among critics of the FCC’s crackdown on
indecency. “It means that really a tiny minority with a very focused political agenda is trying to
censor American television and radio,” said Jonathan Rintels, president and executive director of the
• “Core programming” is programming specifically designed to serve the educational and
informational needs of children ages sixteen and under. Core programming must have the
following characteristics:
• Be at least thirty minutes in length.
• Air between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 10:00 P.M.
• Be a regularly scheduled weekly program.
• The FCC’s rules also limit the amount of commercial matter that may be aired in certain
children’s television programming to 10.5 minutes per hour on weekends and 12 minutes per
hour on weekdays. These requirements apply to television broadcasters, cable operators, and
satellite providers.
• Until 1987, the Fairness Doctrine had required stations to air and engage in controversial-issue
programs that affected their communities. The FCC ended any hope of reviving the Fairness Doctrine
in August 2014 when it issued an order that “deletes both broadcast and cable rules referencing the
Commission’s so-called ‘fairness doctrine.’ The Commission abrogated the fairness doctrine in 1987,
after concluding that it no longer served the public interest, was not statutorily mandated, and was
inconsistent with First Amendment values.” (See the full order at
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1432A1.pdf.)
Ask students to consider whether a version of the Fairness Doctrine, which required broadcast radio
and television stations to provide competing points of view when discussing controversial issues, be
revived.
• Discuss the FCC decision to approve net neutrality rules (under Title II). Note the different
perspectives among Internet companies, consumers, and media activists regarding the FCC’s
February 2015 net-neutrality decision. What do students think about the 2014 net neutrality “Day of
Action” (discussed in the chapter) and the new net neutrality rules enabling the FCC to enforce open
Internet standards on wired and mobile networks?
• Lecture on the issues of freedom of speech and copyright on the Internet. Discuss the possibilities
and implications of legal controls, using domestic and international examples.
•. Explore the copyright issues presented in digital media, particularly sampling. Discuss the reasons
that digital media lend themselves more to copyright infringement than other forms of media.
IV. The First Amendment and Democracy
• A lot of times students (and the public at large) mistake the meanings of patriotism and
nationalism. However, the two are often diametrically opposed.
• Waving a flag is nationalism.
• Dissent is patriotism.
• Saying “My country, right or wrong” and “USA: Love it or leave it” is nationalism.
• Pointing out dangerous flaws in government policy is patriotism.
• Telling people to “Shut up and get in line with the president” or “If you don’t like it, move to
France” is not patriotism, it’s nationalism and is the antithesis of democracy.
• For a better understanding of dissent and patriotism, here are some famous quotes from some of the
MEDIA LITERACY DISCUSSIONS AND EXERCISES
ADVERTISING NC–17 FILMS
If you were the owner of a community newspaper, what would be your policy on accepting advertising
for pornographic movie theaters and movies rated NC–17? Justify whatever policy you develop.
MODELS OF EXPRESSION AND SPEECH
Ask students if they believe that the four models for regulating expression and speech (authoritarian,
communist/state, libertarian, and social responsibility) apply to media in the twenty-first century. In
what ways is the United States, for example, libertarian in its regulation (i.e., for the Internet)? In what
ways does the social responsibility model not completely describe the way we regulate expression and
speech?
“PUBLIC INTEREST”?
Beginning with the Radio Act of 1927, broadcasters were required to operate for the “public interest,
convenience and necessity” in order to obtain a license to use the public’s airwaves.
According to Steven Waldman and the Working Group on Information Needs of Communities, “Over
the FCC’s 75-year existence, it has renewed more than 100,000 licenses. It has denied only four renewal
applications due to the licensee’s failure to meet its public interest programming obligation. No license
renewals have been denied on those grounds in past 30 years. The current system operates neither as a
free market nor as an effectively regulated one; and it does not achieve the public interest goals set out by
Congress or the FCC.” (Steven Waldman and the Working Group on Information Needs of Communities,
The Information Needs of Communities: The Changing Media Landscape in a Broadband Age
[Washington, DC: Federal Communication Commission, Office of Strategic Planning & Policy Analysis,
July 2011], 25. https://transition.fcc.gov/osp/inc-report/The_Information_Needs_of_Communities.pdf.)
Ask students if they believe that broadcast radio and television really operate in the “public interest.”
How can commercial and public broadcasting balance students’ “public interest” with broadcasters’
interest in controlling their programs’ content (including their desires to provide quality content, gain high
ratings, and/or earn the most money from their broadcasts)? How should the FCC assess whether a
broadcaster is operating in the “public interest” when considering whether to renew that broadcaster’s
license?
AGE-RESTRICTION POLICIES
In this Critical Process exercise, investigate the age-restriction policies of local retail outlets that carry
media content for mature audiences.
1. Description. Call or visit local movie theaters, video/DVD stores, music retailers, magazine shops,
and outlets that carry video games. What are their respective policies for (a) selling tickets or
selling discs to the proper age groups for rated movies, especially those rated R and NC–17;
(b) selling recordings with parental advisory labels; (c) displaying and selling adult magazines; and
(d) selling video games rated “mature” or “adults only”? (You can review video game ratings from
the Entertainment Software Rating Board at http://www.esrb.org.) Second, interview customers of
these media outlets. Have their buying or renting experiences been restricted according to age, or
do retailers ignore age guidelines?
2. Analysis. Look for patterns. Are there consistent policies across media outlets? For example, do all
movie theaters have the same admissions policies? Are age policies consistent across all four types
restrictions by media retailers? Does it suggest government action? Or does it suggest a problem with
retailers who use media-labeling systems as the default censorship system (i.e., they don’t sell or rent
any content with adult ratings or parental advisory labels)?
DOES EXPRESSION ON THE INTERNET NEED LAWS?
Pre-Exercise Questions: What kind of communication occurs on the Internet that doesn’t usually occur
anywhere else? Is there anything on the Internet that you wish wasn’t there?
Divide the class into four groups, and stage a mock public forum to consider the current debate over
legal control of the Internet.
• Group 1: The pro-business team, which supports corporate control of the Internet. This group
envisions the Internet as a profit-bearing mass medium threatened by anticorporate rhetoric in the
public discourse. The ideal Internet environment for the pro-business group is one that enables
corporations to directly target Internet users according to their pre-established consumer interests.
This group will align itself if necessary with Group 2 as long as that alliance doesn’t infringe on its
commercial interests.
• Group 2: The pro-government-control and censorship group, which supports content and access
limits on the Internet. This group was highly involved in the antiobscenity portions of the 1996
Telecommunications Act (which were eventually overturned by the Supreme Court). The ideal
Internet environment for the pro-government-control group is one that is “safe” for family use and,
like television, acts as a mass medium for the family. This group also sees the Internet as a tool that
will bring more consumer and educational convenience to the home.
• Group 3: The pro-democracy group, which supports no restrictions on access and content. The
ideal Internet environment for this group is one without commercials, where the Internet becomes a
citizen medium.
• Group 4: The reporters who ask the tough questions.
Students should assemble in groups, isolate the issues important to their group, and prepare for the
public forum. Depending on class size, Groups 1, 2, and 3 should appoint two or three spokespersons as
“specialists” on various issues and consider what questions they will be asked by the reporters. Group 4
should brainstorm and prepare an equal number of questions for each group.
After the groups determine their strategies, they should reconvene. Groups 1, 2, and 3 should briefly
state their positions before opening the forum up to questions from reporters.
Afterward (with about ten minutes to go in the class period), the class should consider which group
made the most persuasive case. Can compromise be achieved among the groups, or do compromises
completely undermine each group’s position?
CLASSROOM MEDIA RESOURCES
LAUNCHPAD FOR MEDIA & CULTURE: http://www.macmillanhighered.com/mediaculture11e
Stephen Colbert Interviews John Seigenthaler (2014, 5:10 minutes). In this video, Stephen Colbert, on his
former Comedy Central fake news program The Colbert Report, interviews John Seigenthaler, author
of “A False Wikipedia ‘Biography.’”
Bloggers and Legal Rights (2009, 4:06 minutes). Legal and journalism scholars discuss the legal rights
and responsibilities of bloggers. Featuring Richard Campbell, Frank LoMonte, and Joe Urschel.
Bullying Converges Online (2013, 4:35 minutes). This video explains the spread of cyberbullying and its
effects.
The First Amendment and Student Speech (2010, 2:47 minutes). This video explores the involvement of
school administration in the student newspaper and how, from a legal (and educational) standpoint,
less involvement can be a good thing. Featuring Richard Campbell and Frank LoMonte.
Freedom of Information (2010, 4:51 minutes). In this video, George Kennedy interviews Ken Bunting
about the National Freedom of Information Coalition.
VIDEOS/DVDS/CDS
Freedom of Expression (2007, 61 minutes). This documentary explores the battles being waged in courts,
classrooms, museums, film studios, and the Internet over control of our cultural commons.
Distributed by the Media Education Foundation, 800-897-0089; http://www.mediaed.org.
This Film Is Not Yet Rated (2005, 97 minutes). Academy Award–nominated director Kirby Dick takes an
incisive look at the Motion Picture Association of America, finds out who is on the secretive rating
board, and documents the movie-rating process. Ironically, the MPAA slapped the documentary with
an NC–17 rating for explicit scenes. This Film Is Not Yet Rated was then “rating surrendered” and
was recut for an R rating.
WEB SITES
Benton Foundation (FCC reform news): https://www.benton.org/taxonomy/term/95
Benton Foundation (network neutrality news): https://www.benton.org/taxonomy/term/57
Benton Foundation (news regarding censorship): https://www.benton.org/taxonomy/term/6134
Benton Foundation (news about upcoming policy issues): https://www.benton.org/taxonomy/term/6132
Center for Democracy and Technology: http://www.cdt.org
Electronic Frontier Foundation: https://www.eff.org
Federal Communications Commission: http://www.fcc.gov
First Amendment Center: http://www.newseuminstitute.org/first-amendment-center
Legal Information Institute (Cornell University Law School): http://www.law.cornell.edu
National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors: https://www.natoa.org
New America Foundation: http://www.newamerica.org
PBS Flashpoints: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/cultureshock/flashpoints
Pew Research Center: http://www.pewinternet.org
Reporters without Borders: http://www.rsf.org
FURTHER READING
Cohn, Marjorie, and David Dow. Cameras in the Courtroom: Television and the Pursuit of Justice.
Lanham, MD: Rowman, 2002.
Davis, Charles N., and Sigman L. Splichal. Access Denied: Freedom of Information in the Information
Age. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 2000.
Fish, Stanley. There’s No Such Thing as Free Speech: And It’s a Good Thing, Too. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1994.
Lessig, Lawrence. The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the Commons in a Connected World. New York:
Vintage, 2002.
McChesney, Robert W. The Problem of the Media: U.S. Communication Politics in the Twenty-First
Century. New York: Monthly Review, 2004.
McChesney, Robert W., Russell Newman, and Ben Scott. The Future of Media: Resistance and Reform in
the 21st Century. New York: Seven Stories, 2005.
Nichols, John, and Robert W. McChesney. Tragedy and Farce: How the American Media Sell Wars, Spin
Elections, and Destroy Democracy. New York: New Press, 2005.
Peters, John Durham. Courting the Abyss: Free Speech and the Liberal Tradition. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 2005.
Rainie, Lee, and M. Duggan. “Privacy and Information Sharing.” Washington, DC: Pew Research Center,
December 2015. http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/01/14/2016/Privacy-and-Information-Sharing.
Starr, Paul. The Creation of the Media: The Political Origins of Mass Communications. New York: Basic
Books, 2004.
Tillinghast, Charles H. American Broadcast Regulation and the First Amendment: Another Look. Ames:
Iowa State University Press, 2000.
Extended Case Studies from Previous Editions
For every new Media & Culture edition, we take a breaking news issue and develop a comprehensive
five-step critical process around that topic. For this eleventh edition update, the Extended Case Study
revolves around “Analyzing the Coverage of the Volkswagen and Takata Crises” (see pp. 534–542). In
the last four editions, we developed Extended Case Studies on:
• Mobile Video Reveals Police Brutality and Racism (10th Edition Update, 2016)
• Social Media and Finding Real Happiness (10th Edition, 2016)
• Patriot or Traitor? Unveiling Government Surveillance of Us (9th Edition Update, 2015)
• Our Digital World and the Self-Invasion of Privacy (9th Edition, 2014)
In case these “older” Extended Case Study topics from
previous editions—all of which still hold their
relevancy—fit better in your particular course than our current topic, you will find both teaching ideas
and the entire text for previous Extended Case Studies below.
When can you teach the Extended Case Study?
We suggest three different ways to integrate the Extended Case Study:
1. Near the beginning of the course, and referenced repeatedly throughout the course. It can be
used as an introduction to the five steps of the critical approach to media literacy in Chapter 1.
3. Throughout the course, which works especially well if you organize your course more
thematically and want to draw connections across particular topics (e.g., privacy, public relations,
news media) using the Extended Case Study as a reference point. With every Extended Case Study
laid out below, we highlight ways to do just that.
#
Extended Case Study: Mobile Video Reveals Police Brutality and
Racism (10th Edition Update, 2016)
If you have been following events of the past few years—uprisings and protests in Ferguson, Missouri;
Baltimore, Maryland; North Charleston, South Carolina; Cleveland and Cincinnati, Ohio; Madison,
Wisconsin; New York, New York; and elsewhere, all covered by news outlets and on social media—you
would certainly be aware of concerns about police brutality across the United States and the fact that the
Unfortunately, this is an old and persistent issue. In 1968, after racial uprisings in Newark,
Detroit, and more than one hundred other cities in the year before, the federal government released the
Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders (or the Kerner Report, after the Illinois
governor who headed the commission).1 The videos advanced the Black Lives Matter movement, begun
after the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the 2012 Florida shooting death of seventeen-year-old
African American Trayvon Martin, a young man in a hoodie sweatshirt walking back to his father’s house
with a can of juice and bag of Skittles candy. The movement spread on Twitter via the #BlackLivesMatter
hashtag.
One law professor and former prosecutor called this new wave of video evidence “the C-SPAN of
the streets.”2 But do these new videos of police shootings change the charge from the Kerner Report
almost fifty years ago that the news media tend to rely more on official sources and less on citizen
sources? For this case study, we will look at stories of police shootings of African Americans and whether
or not available video evidence changes news media narratives about the events.
#
As developed in Chapter 1, a media-literate perspective involves mastering five overlapping
critical stages that build on one another: (1) description: paying close attention, taking notes, and
researching the subject under study; (2) analysis: discovering and focusing on significant patterns that
emerge from the description stage; (3) interpretation: asking and answering the “What does that mean?”
and “So what?” questions about your findings; (4) evaluation: arriving at a judgment about whether
something is good, bad, poor, or mediocre, which involves subordinating one’s personal views to the
See:
• Washington Post, Police Shootings: http://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics
/national/police-shootings/
• The Guardian, The Counted: People Killed by Police in the US: http://www.theguardian.com/us-
news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database
First, examine at least five cases of African Americans killed by police in 2015 in which video
was available (e.g., Christian Taylor, Samuel DuBose, Walter Scott, Freddy Gray, and Eric Harris). Read
the sample news media stories at the bottom of the profile of each of the five cases.
Then, select five more cases of unarmed African Americans killed by police without video
footage of the incidents. Again, read the news stories linked for each case.
#
Step 2: Analysis
In the second stage of the critical process, you will isolate patterns that emerge that call for closer
attention. For example, the Guardian has found from its analysis that “black Americans are more than
twice as likely to be unarmed when killed during encounters with police as white people.”3
Specifically, though, first look at sources. In the cases with video available, does the news media
Step 3: Interpretation
In the interpretation stage, you will determine the larger meanings of the patterns you have analyzed. The
most difficult stage in criticism, interpretation, demands an answer to the questions “So what?” and
“What does all this mean?”
The newspaper databases themselves increase visibility by archiving these cases and enabling us
to look closer and do our own analysis. But does the existence of citizen or police video change the story
for journalists in terms of emphasis on official points of view versus citizen points of view? Does it seem
to you that citizen and police videos help to better resolve these cases, or does it become just one more
disputed piece of evidence?
Step 4: Evaluation
The evaluation stage of the critical process is about making informed judgments. Building on description,
#
officers, 92 percent of Americans supported the idea of body cams in a 2015 national survey.4 Is our
desire that all patrolling officers wear body cams justified? Could we, as the New York Times notes, “have
unrealistic expectations” that the cameras will “provide a kind of impartial witness to every interaction?”5
Do you have concerns about who gets to see the video footage and under what circumstances?6 Finally,
instead of body cams, is there something about the training of police officers that needs to change?
Step 5: Engagement
The fifth stage of the critical process—engagement—encourages you to take action, adding your own
voice to the process of shaping our culture and environment.
You can also comment on any shootings around the country or in your area. Both the Washington
Post and Guardian interactive sites above have links to retweet or send tips or additions to any of the
cases listed on their sites.
What’s most important is to remember that police departments are public services, and, as a
member of the public, you have the power and ability to participate in conversations and be part of the
solution.
ENDNOTES
1. United States. National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, U.S. Government Printing Office,
1968, p. 9.
#
2. Richard Pérez-Peña and Timothy Williams, “Glare of Video Is Shifting Public’s View of Police,” New
York Times, July 30, 2015, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/31/us/through-lens-of-video -a-
transformed-view-of-police.html.
3. Jon Swaine, Oliver Laughland, and Jamiles Lartey, “Black Americans Killed by Police Twice as Likely
to Be Unarmed as White People,” The Guardian, June 1, 2015, http://www .theguardian.com/us-
news/2015/jun/01/black-americans -killed-by-police-analysis.
5. Ibid.
6. danah boyd and Alex Rosenblat, “It’s Not Too Late to Get Body Cameras Right,” The Atlantic, May
15, 2015, http://www.theatlantic .com/technology/archive/2015/05/its-not-too-late-to-get-body -cameras-
right/393257/. Also see Robinson Meyer, “The People’s Manifesto on Police Body-Cameras,” The
Atlantic, May 15, 2015, http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/05 /civil-rights-rules-for-
body-cameras/393377/
#
Extended Case Study: Social Media and Finding Real Happiness
(10th Edition)
Social media connect us in so many different ways, expanding our human interactions beyond the limits
of meeting in person. As noted in Chapter 2, social media include any blogs, collaborative projects,
content communities, social networking sites, virtual game worlds, and virtual social worlds that expand
For at least some of us, the social-mediated version of ourselves becomes the predominant way
we experience the world. As Time magazine noted in 2014, “experiences don’t feel fully real” until you
have “tweeted them or tumbled them or YouTubed them—and the world has congratulated you for doing
so.”1 The flip side of promoting our own experiences on social media as the most awesome happenings
ever (with the added subtext of “too bad you aren’t here”) is the social anxiety associated with reading
about other people’s experiences and the accompanying realization that you are not actually there.
The problem is called Fear of Missing Out (FOMO), and one report defines it as “the uneasy and
positive spin on people’s lives. But social media and mobile technology make being exposed to the
interactions you missed a 24/7 phenomenon. Exposure to a hypothetical better experience or better life is
potentially constant.
According to a report in Computers in Human Behavior, with FOMO there is a “desire to stay
continually connected with what others are doing,” so the person suffering from the anxiety continues to
#
be tethered to social media, tracking “friends” and sacrificing time that might be spent having in-person,
unmediated experiences.3 Some related social media problems can get even more serious. A study by
University of Michigan researchers found that the use of Facebook (the most popular social media site)
makes people feel worse about themselves. The study of college students over two weeks found that the
more they used Facebook, the more two components of well-being declined: how people feel moment to
moment and how satisfied they are with their lives. These declines occurred regardless of how many
presents an important question about our culture to investigate. For this case study, we will look at social
media in our lives and whether they help expand our friendships, undermine our social well-being, or
offer a mixed result of good and bad outcomes.
As detailed in Chapter 1 and throughout the book, a media-literate perspective involves mastering
five overlapping critical stages that build on each other: (1) description: paying close attention, taking
notes, and researching the subject under study; (2) analysis: discovering and focusing on significant
patterns that emerge from the description stage; (3) interpretation: asking and answering the “What does
that mean?” and “So what?” questions about our findings; (4) evaluation: arriving at a judgment about
whether something is good, bad, poor, or mediocre, which involves subordinating our personal views to
the critical assessment resulting from the first three stages; and (5) engagement: taking some action that
connects our critical interpretations and evaluations with our responsibility as citizens.
One tool to analyze social media use and the Fear of Missing Out was developed by a team of
researchers in the United Kingdom and the United States.5 They created a ten-item questionnaire to
#
measure levels of FOMO. Respondents answer each question on a five-point scale. Here’s a reproduction
of that scale and questionnaire:
Respondents answer each question on a five-point scale, as follows: (1) not at all true of me; (2) slightly
true of me; (3) moderately true of me; (4) very true of me; or (5) extremely true of me.
1. I fear others have more rewarding experiences than me.
2. I fear my friends have more rewarding experiences than me.
3. I get worried when I find out my friends are having fun without me.
4. I get anxious when I don’t know what my friends are up to.
5. It is important that I understand my friends’ “in jokes.”
6. Sometimes, I wonder if I spend too much time keeping up with what is going on.
7. It bothers me when I miss an opportunity to meet up with friends.
8. When I have a good time, it is important for me to share the details online (e.g., updating status).
9. When I miss out on a planned get-together, it bothers me.
10. When I go on vacation, I continue to keep tabs on what my friends are doing.
Other information to gather for your subjects could include the number of social media platforms
they use (Facebook, Twitter, Tumbler, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Google+, Instagram, Vine, etc.) and how
frequently they use them. It would also be interesting to know if the subjects ever took a break from social
media, and if so, why, and how long the break lasted. For example, one sixteen-year-old female high
school student reported, “I have disabled my Facebook a couple of times and it’s been nice, but I felt like
I missed out on too much, so I went back to it.” To completely give up Facebook would be harder, she
said. “I would just have to learn how to not know what people are doing all the time, and more
importantly, not to care.”
Step 2: Analysis
#
In the second stage of the critical process, you will isolate patterns that emerged from the interviews that
call for closer attention. The following questions can help you identify patterns in your results:
• How did the total score on the ten-item FOMO questionnaire correspond to the number and
frequency of use of social media platforms for each person?
• Are your interview subjects aware of the Fear of Missing Out issue in their lives? Do they see
social media as a good thing overall in their lives or as something in which they would like to be less
involved if they could? Do they feel forced to participate in social media because so many other
people they know (or want to know) are on it?
• What kinds of things do subjects spend less time doing because of time spent on social media?
• Do your subjects who spend less time with social media report a higher level of satisfaction?
• Are there patterns in the particular social media sites that your subjects find most valuable and/or
least valuable? That is, do some social media make them feel better than others?
Our sample sixteen-year-old student noted that she uses Instagram and Tumblr just for finding
cool images but that texting has the potential to induce anxiety and unhappiness: “You feel bad when
someone doesn’t text you back. I know someone who is notoriously bad at responding, and honestly it
makes me feel really bad when they don’t respond. So you start second-guessing yourself. It’s really
stressful.” Your subjects might have experienced other events with social media—from finding good
friends or someone they love to being bullied or humiliated on social media. Are there any patterns here?
Step 3: Interpretation
In the interpretation stage, you will determine the larger meanings of the patterns you have analyzed. The
most difficult stage in criticism, interpretation demands an answer to the questions “So what?” and “What
does all this mean?”
For example, is there social pressure to present ourselves in the best way possible in social media
photos, videos, and texts, thus creating an inaccurate public presentation of our lives? (Or think about it
this way: Are we presenting ourselves in the same way that a business might present itself on social
#