1 edition of Cable television and the First Amendment. found in the catalog.
Cable television and the First Amendment.
by Media Institute in Washington, D.C. (3017 M. St., N.W., Washington 20007)
Written in English
Bibliography: p. 15-16.
|Series||Issues in communications,, 3|
|Contributions||Media Institute (Washington, D.C.)|
|LC Classifications||KF2844.Z9 C29 1986|
|The Physical Object|
|Pagination||16 p. ;|
|Number of Pages||16|
|LC Control Number||86164612|
First, cable operators have lost their “bottleneck monopoly power” that justified, in the eyes of the Supreme Court in , giving cable operators weakened First Amendment protection. "Unlike in the s, cable operators face significant competition in most local markets from satellite and telco TV providers. What is the First Amendment status of cable operators in relation to broadcasters and print publishers? Strict scrutiny is the proper test for content-based regulations applied to cable television, and intermediate test is to be used for content-neutral regulations.
The book offers 54 summaries of the most important First Amendment issues of , written by several experts such as Robert Corn-Revere, the Washington, D.C., attorney who argued Playboy's case. First Amendment Status of Cable TV v. Broadcast Electronic media content can be viewed differently according to personal opinions, but the First Amendment Rights of the United States Constitution lay the foundation for the legal system that is to be followed. These rights form a guide that help.
The Court similarly was slow to recognize full First Amendment protection for cable television programming. In FCC v. Midwest Video Corp. () it described First Amendment concerns about compelling cable-access programming requirements as “not frivolous,” but did not take a position on the correct approach. The Court’s lack of direction. Cable Television, New Technologies and the First Amendment After Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. F.C.C: Erik Forde Uglana* INTRODUCTION From the moment it emerged as an independently viable communications medium, the cable television industry has been forced,to operate within the shadow of regulatory : Erik Forde Ugland.
Heat, hell and humour
very worried sparrow
little mother goose
The gold thread
Water-quality assessment of the Ozark Plateaus study unit, Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma
Dont Kiss Your Turtle Goodbye
Guide to the National Museum
Trekking north of Pokhara
Fiction for Key Stage 1
Urban airshed model study of five cities
Wisdom and management in the knowledge economy
Wear of abrasion resisting materials.
: Cable Television and the First Amendment (): Books. Skip to main content. Try Prime Books. Go Search EN ® Best Sellers Children's Books Textbooks Textbook Rentals Sell Us Your Books Best Books of the Month Kindle eBooks Books. Additional Physical Format: Online version: Parsons, Patrick.
Cable television and the First Amendment. Lexington, Massachusetts: Lexington Books, © It is divided into four parts: the history, methodology, Cable television and the First Amendment.
book philosophical foundations of the First Amendment; topics such as First Amendment issues that arise in cable television and in regulating children's access to the Internet; issues in First Amendment law such as the public forum doctrine, the compelled speech doctrine, and the free expression rights of government employees; and the text, Cited by: 6.
Book Review: American Broadcasting and the First Amendment. by Lucas A. Powe, Jr.; Cable Television and the First Amendment. by Patrick Parsons. Henry Geller Follow this and additional works at: Part of theLaw Commons This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law : Henry Geller.
CABLE TELEVISION AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT* INTRODUCTION The traditional argument reconciling governmental regulation of tele-vision with the first amendment is based upon the technology of broadcasting. The reasoning is that, as the electromagnetic spectrum is finite, the number of channels available is limited.
Sincethe FCC has required cable television systems to dedicate some of their channels to local broadcast television stations. The Supreme Court upheld these "must-carry" rules in the mids. But last year's DC Circuit decision striking down the FCC's 30% cap on cable ownership lead Cablevision to challenge the must-carry rules.
The Court has recognized that cable television “implicates First Amendment interests,” because a cable operator communicates ideas through selection of original programming and through exercise of editorial discretion in determining which stations to include in its offering. Moreover, “settled. The First Amendment and the Cable Television Operator: An Unprotective Shield Against Public Access Requirements By MICHAEL I.
MEYERSON* Cable television is in the forefront of America's "communica tions revolution.". In the words of Justice Brennan, "The po tential of [t] he new industry to augment communication. Television, the First Amendment, and the Role of Government People for Better TV, The basic rules which determine who gets to use the public airwaves and how they get to use them are set by our representatives in Congress.
But the people as a whole retain their interest in free speech by radio and their collective right to have the medium function consistently with the ends and purposes of the First Amendment.
It is the right of the viewers and listeners, not the right of the broadcasters, which is. The censorship regulations and their effect on the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment has been discussed in relation to cable televisions also.
In the case of Turner Broadcasting System v. Federal Communications Commission, the Supreme Court said that cable television was entitled to virtually the same constitutional guarantees of free speech as newspapers and magazines.
A forceful, lively argument for deregulation of broadcasting. Powe (Law/Texas) identifies his target at once: the assumption ""that broadcasting is not entitled to the full range of First Amendment privileges enjoyed by the print media."" This assumption, he explains, has dominated legal consideration of broadcasting—radio and TV—since the 's, when the Federal Radio Commission was.
It is divided into four parts: the history, methodology, and philosophical foundations of the First Amendment; topics such as First Amendment issues that arise in cable television and in regulating children’s access to the Internet; issues in First Amendment law such as the public forum doctrine, the compelled speech doctrine, and the free expression rights of government employees; and the text.
It is divided into four parts: the history, methodology, and philosophical foundations of the First Amendment; topics such as First Amendment issues that arise in cable television and in regulating children's access to the Internet; issues in First Amendment law such as the public forum doctrine, the compelled speech doctrine, and the free expression rights of government employees; and the text.
According to Timothy Wu’s Book The and in violation of the First Amendment and The Cable Communication Act of la carte options would reduce prices and make cable TV Author: Brad Adgate. This product provides a short and readable source for individuals interested in constitutional law, First Amendment law, and communications law.
It is divided into four parts: the history, methodology, and philosophical foundations of the First Amendment; topics such as First Amendment issues that arise in cable television and in regulating children's access to the Internet; issues in First.
In Mike Diana became the first American artist to receive a conviction for obscenity for drawing cartoons that were judged legally obscene. Child pornography is illegal in the United States. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that it is not protected by the First Amendment, and even if not obscene.
The authors argue that to defend an unrestricted freedom to broadcast by invoking the First Ammendent is an Two well-known experts-Newton N.
Minow is a former chairperson of the FCC-suggest bold new ways to think about television and its influence on American /5. Discusses the impact of the must-carry provision in the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of in relation to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Utilization of the case of `Turner Broadcasting System Inc. FCC' as legal framework; O'Brien factors; Injustices brought by the interpretation of the.
Through this statute, Congress attempted to uphold the First Amendment interest of cable audiences to receive diversified information as specified in the Red Lion Broadcasting Co.
Federal Communications Commission court case of Acts amended: Communications Act of. The book analyzes disputes over broadcasters' free speech rights and government regulation. Donahue demonstrates that dramatic growth in emerging cable television and satellite technologies is significantly expanding television news and politics, making existing regulations obsolete.The most sophisticated communication technology available when the First Amendment was written was: (select one).
Printing press. The most important, recent set of regulations covering today's electronic media technologies is: (select one).Despite the broad freedom of expression guaranteed by the First Amendment, there are some historically rooted exceptions. First, the government may generally restrict the time, place, or manner of speech, if the restrictions are unrelated to what the speech says and leave people with enough alternative ways of expressing their views.