Freedom of the Press/Conflicts with other Rights/Dependants: Difference between revisions

From
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(transformed)
 
(transformed)
Line 5: Line 5:
|questionHeading=Are there other specific rights that are critical to the exercise of this right?  Can you identify specific examples of this?
|questionHeading=Are there other specific rights that are critical to the exercise of this right?  Can you identify specific examples of this?
|pageLevel=Question
|pageLevel=Question
|contents=The first right that is critical to the exercise of freedom of the press is the right to free speech and expression. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers” (United Nations [[Probable year::1948]]) . Without the right to free speech and expression, the press would be very limited. This leads to another right which is critical to the exercise of freedom of the press which is the right to criticize the government. Before the American Revolution, the government did not allow freedom of the press because they were fearful of the spread of unfavorable information. The first American newspaper was published in Boston in [[Probable year::1690]]  called, Publick Occurrences, Both Foreign and Domestick. The British government banned this publication because it was critical (Kahane [[Probable year::1976]],  203). Years later in [[Probable year::1773]],  Hamilton helped to establish the principle that libel could not be punished unless it was false information. This meant that critiques of the government could be published, so long as that information was true (Kahane [[Probable year::1976]],  205). Hence, the ability to criticize the government became recognized as necessary for the realization of freedom of the press.  
|contents=The first right that is critical to the exercise of freedom of the press is the right to free speech and expression. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers” (United Nations [[Probable year:: 1948]]) . Without the right to free speech and expression, the press would be very limited. This leads to another right which is critical to the exercise of freedom of the press which is the right to criticize the government. Before the American Revolution, the government did not allow freedom of the press because they were fearful of the spread of unfavorable information. The first American newspaper was published in Boston in [[Probable year:: 1690]]  called, Publick Occurrences, Both Foreign and Domestick. The British government banned this publication because it was critical (Kahane [[Probable year:: 1976]],  203). Years later in [[Probable year:: 1773]],  Hamilton helped to establish the principle that libel could not be punished unless it was false information. This meant that critiques of the government could be published, so long as that information was true (Kahane [[Probable year:: 1976]],  205). Hence, the ability to criticize the government became recognized as necessary for the realization of freedom of the press.  


A similar principle was later upheld within the case of New York Times Company vs. Sullivan in [[Probable year::1964]]  (New York Times Company v. Sullivan). In [[Probable year::1960]],  the New York Times printed a newspaper with a civil-rights fundraising editorial advertisement titled, “Heed Their Rising Voices.” The advertisement was opposed to the way Alabama law enforcement had treated Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.. L.B. Sullivan filed a lawsuit against the New York Times on the basis that there were mistakes in the newspaper that called his reputation into question because he was a supervisor of the Alabama local police. Originally, a jury awarded him $500,000 in damages. However, the Supreme Court later reversed this decision and dismissed the damage award. The Court established the “actual malice” test which made it so public officials could only receive damages against libel in cases where the libel was stated “with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not” (New York Times Company v. Sullivan). In the case of New York Times Company vs. Sullivan, the publication did not meet the standards of the actual malice test. According to Justice William J. Brennan Jr. and the majority, “debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust and wide-open” (New York Times Company v. Sullivan). The majority implied that mistakes within publication would happen within any democratic society, and that debate and criticism of government affairs would be necessary for a truly free press.
A similar principle was later upheld within the case of New York Times Company vs. Sullivan in [[Probable year:: 1964]]  (New York Times Company v. Sullivan). In [[Probable year:: 1960]],  the New York Times printed a newspaper with a civil-rights fundraising editorial advertisement titled, “Heed Their Rising Voices.” The advertisement was opposed to the way Alabama law enforcement had treated Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.. L.B. Sullivan filed a lawsuit against the New York Times on the basis that there were mistakes in the newspaper that called his reputation into question because he was a supervisor of the Alabama local police. Originally, a jury awarded him $500,000 in damages. However, the Supreme Court later reversed this decision and dismissed the damage award. The Court established the “actual malice” test which made it so public officials could only receive damages against libel in cases where the libel was stated “with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not” (New York Times Company v. Sullivan). In the case of New York Times Company vs. Sullivan, the publication did not meet the standards of the actual malice test. According to Justice William J. Brennan Jr. and the majority, “debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust and wide-open” (New York Times Company v. Sullivan). The majority implied that mistakes within publication would happen within any democratic society, and that debate and criticism of government affairs would be necessary for a truly free press.


Another right that is critical to the exercise of freedom of the press is the right of the public to receive information. Between [[Probable year::1964]]  and [[Probable year::1968]],  the modern conception of freedom of the press changed. Free press began to not only mean the ability to publish as one pleases, but also that citizens have a right to receive information about the government in order to promote democracy. This would act as a check on the power of officials. With this, the extent to which freedom of the press could be protected expanded (Coyle [[Probable year::2017]]) . In [[Probable year::1996]],  the Federal Freedom of Information Act granted citizens the right to access many federal records. There are exceptions and limitations to this access, such as for privacy concerns, but in general, the right to know is upheld (Emerson [[Probable year::1979]],  351).
Another right that is critical to the exercise of freedom of the press is the right of the public to receive information. Between [[Probable year:: 1964]]  and [[Probable year:: 1968]],  the modern conception of freedom of the press changed. Free press began to not only mean the ability to publish as one pleases, but also that citizens have a right to receive information about the government in order to promote democracy. This would act as a check on the power of officials. With this, the extent to which freedom of the press could be protected expanded (Coyle [[Probable year:: 2017]]) . In [[Probable year:: 1996]],  the Federal Freedom of Information Act granted citizens the right to access many federal records. There are exceptions and limitations to this access, such as for privacy concerns, but in general, the right to know is upheld (Emerson [[Probable year:: 1979]],  351).




}}
}}

Revision as of 22:19, 28 December 2022

Are there other specific rights that are critical to the exercise of this right? Can you identify specific examples of this?

The first right that is critical to the exercise of freedom of the press is the right to free speech and expression. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers” (United Nations 1948) . Without the right to free speech and expression, the press would be very limited. This leads to another right which is critical to the exercise of freedom of the press which is the right to criticize the government. Before the American Revolution, the government did not allow freedom of the press because they were fearful of the spread of unfavorable information. The first American newspaper was published in Boston in 1690 called, Publick Occurrences, Both Foreign and Domestick. The British government banned this publication because it was critical (Kahane 1976, 203). Years later in 1773, Hamilton helped to establish the principle that libel could not be punished unless it was false information. This meant that critiques of the government could be published, so long as that information was true (Kahane 1976, 205). Hence, the ability to criticize the government became recognized as necessary for the realization of freedom of the press.

A similar principle was later upheld within the case of New York Times Company vs. Sullivan in 1964 (New York Times Company v. Sullivan). In 1960, the New York Times printed a newspaper with a civil-rights fundraising editorial advertisement titled, “Heed Their Rising Voices.” The advertisement was opposed to the way Alabama law enforcement had treated Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.. L.B. Sullivan filed a lawsuit against the New York Times on the basis that there were mistakes in the newspaper that called his reputation into question because he was a supervisor of the Alabama local police. Originally, a jury awarded him $500,000 in damages. However, the Supreme Court later reversed this decision and dismissed the damage award. The Court established the “actual malice” test which made it so public officials could only receive damages against libel in cases where the libel was stated “with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not” (New York Times Company v. Sullivan). In the case of New York Times Company vs. Sullivan, the publication did not meet the standards of the actual malice test. According to Justice William J. Brennan Jr. and the majority, “debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust and wide-open” (New York Times Company v. Sullivan). The majority implied that mistakes within publication would happen within any democratic society, and that debate and criticism of government affairs would be necessary for a truly free press.

Another right that is critical to the exercise of freedom of the press is the right of the public to receive information. Between 1964 and 1968, the modern conception of freedom of the press changed. Free press began to not only mean the ability to publish as one pleases, but also that citizens have a right to receive information about the government in order to promote democracy. This would act as a check on the power of officials. With this, the extent to which freedom of the press could be protected expanded (Coyle 2017) . In 1996, the Federal Freedom of Information Act granted citizens the right to access many federal records. There are exceptions and limitations to this access, such as for privacy concerns, but in general, the right to know is upheld (Emerson 1979, 351).