Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Fairness Doctrine: Fair To Whom, Loretta T. Menkes
The Fairness Doctrine: Fair To Whom, Loretta T. Menkes
Cleveland State Law Review
This Note contends that the fairness doctrine, as presently applied, fails to meet its legislative purpose and violates constitutionally protected rights. This Note will examine the standards and policies established by the FCC as judicially approved in Red Lion Broadcasting, Inc. v. FCC and American Sec. Council Educ. Foundation v. FCC. Practical application of these standards and policies will be explored in three categories: 1) controversial issue programming; 2) commercial advertisements; and 3) political messages. Finally, a solution to the arbitrary and discriminatory application of this amorphous doctrine will be suggested.
The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress
The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress
Cleveland State Law Review
The United States Supreme Court, in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, had a magnificent opportunity to either begin the process of defining first amendment limitations on the scope of the authority of the FCC to regulate the content of broadcast expression, explicate a rational ground for the differential status of broadcasting, or perhaps both. The purpose of this article is not to debate the wisdom of the use of sensitive language on the electronic media or elsewhere. Nor is it our purpose to debate the substantive question of whether the Court reached the proper result in Pacifica, although we will necessarily …
The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress
The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress
Cleveland State Law Review
The United States Supreme Court, in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, had a magnificent opportunity to either begin the process of defining first amendment limitations on the scope of the authority of the FCC to regulate the content of broadcast expression, explicate a rational ground for the differential status of broadcasting, or perhaps both. The purpose of this article is not to debate the wisdom of the use of sensitive language on the electronic media or elsewhere. Nor is it our purpose to debate the substantive question of whether the Court reached the proper result in Pacifica, although we will necessarily …