PROTECT THE PRESS TODAY
Making Headlines is a podcast focused on understanding the state of journalism in today's political and social climate. By talking to academic experts, students, and journalists, we hope to gain a broader perspective on press freedoms, censorship, and journalist protections world-wide. Listen below, and explore our site for more information and resources.
I sit down with UCSB communication professor Miriam Metzger, an expert on mass communication and first amendment protections, to discuss the history and potentially bleak future of the news industry.
How are local journalists navigating a complicated media landscape with a high amount of public distrust? I sit down with Adri Davies, News Reporter at the Santa Barbara Independent, and Hannah Jackson, Editor-in-Chief of the Daily Nexus, to get the inside scoop.
See PODCAST CREDITS for audio sources and information.
THE PROBLEM
In a time of consistent "fake news" rhetoric and growing polarization, journalistic freedoms are becoming increasingly threatened. Not only are sectors of the American public communicating an immense distrust of news entities, but current politicians are characterizing the press as the "enemy of the people." While this rhetoric is widely circulated, many individuals are unaware of the extent to which this vilification has impacted the social and political sphere in the United States and abroad. The free press has been protected since America's conception, and it's more necessary than ever to understand its role in holding government entities accountability.
41%
of Americans have a great deal/fair amount of trust in the mass media
65
journalists were imprisoned world-wide for "fake news" charges between
2012-2019
64%
of adults worldwide say the media have a lot of freedom
31%
of Republicans in the United States say journalists have very low ethical standards
CASES
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
(1964)
Landmark Libel Decision
New York Times v. Sullivan extended first amendment press freedoms and made it significantly more difficult for public, political figures to win libel lawsuits, otherwise known as defamation cases. Justice William J. Brennan wrote the unanimous opinion at the time and changed the standards for winning libel lawsuits from proving falsehood to proving actual malice. This "minimized the chill on political speech and gave new protection to previously repugnant forms of discourse." It was Brennan's hope that expanding press protections would foster "a rich political discourse and an open marketplace for ideas" (9).
New York Times Co. v. US
(1971)
Mediating national security and public interest
New York Times Co. v. United States is regarded as one of the most significant decisions in favor of the free press. In what is referred to colloquially as the "The Pentagon Papers Case," the United States government attempted to invoke prior restraint to prevent the New York Times from publishing excerpts from a top-secret Pentagon study. The papers included damaging evidence of US involvement in Southeast Asia dating as far back at 1945. The court ruled in favor of the New York Times, and scholars today consider it "one of the most important judicial decisions protecting the press from government censorship ever reached by any court in any western democracy" (13).
Reno v. ACLU
(1997)
Defining the relationship between the internet and first amendment freedoms
Reno v. ACLU was the courts first brush with regulating or not regulating the Internet. Ultimately, the courts applied the First Amendment to Internet communications, ruling that this new medium should be afforded the same complete freedoms as print. The courts have historically taken a medium "specific" approach to regulating various press platforms, and decided against regulating the Internet similar to broadcast and cable. However, because traditional broadcast and cable programs are moving into the online space, more and more content is achieving full First Amendment protection. Individuals have expressed a growing concern that certain obscene content will need to be regulated for the protection of children and other vulnerable individuals (6).
How does the
United States compare to other Countries?
It's no secret we live in a highly global society. But how do press freedoms in the US compare to those in other countries, and how has recent "fake news" rhetoric affected societies across the world?