COM 200 - UNIT 2 NOTES

PRESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION SUBSECTION TOPIC: RHETORICAL PRESIDENCY

•*RHETORICAL PRESIDENCY BACKGROUND* -rhetorical: expressed in terms intended to persuade or impress. 1. *IN THE US, PRESIDENTS HAVE A TREMENDOUS ABILITY TO AFFECT THE COMMUNICATION ABOUT CERTAIN ISSUES!* a. *SO WE'LL BE TALKIN ABOUT PRESIDENTIAL RHETORIC* 2. *SOOOO PRESIDENTS HAVE TO PERFORM A MYRIAD OF COMMUNCIATION TASKS SUCH AS..* -GET ELECTED -SUPPORT THEIR POLICIES -SUPPORT THEIR PARTY -NEED TO ENGAGE IN CEREMONIAL ACTIVITIES -GET RELECTED -PROTECT THEIR LEGACY a. *THIS IS ALL SCOOPED IN TO PRESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION, PRESIDENTIAL RHETORIC* ----------------------------------- •*RHETORICAL PRESIDENCY* 1. *DEFINITION OF RHETORICAL PRESIDENCY: THE PRESIDENT SPEAKING DIRECTLY TO THE ELECTORATE* a. *THE TERM HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME, IS OFTEN ASSOCIATED W THIS BOOK BY JEFFREY TOULOUS* b. *TOULOUS TALKS ABOUT THIS SHIFT!!!!! OF THE PRESIDENT!!!! SPEAKING DIRECTLY TO THE ELECTORATE* c. *EARLIER!! PRESIDENTS HAD RELIED ON WRITTEN COMMUNICATION VERY HEAVILY* -IE: SOMEONE LIKE CHESTER A. ARTHUR IS PROBABLY GONNA BE WRITING MORE AS THE PRESIDENT THAN HE WOULD BE SPEAKING =PRESIDENTIAL WORK WAS MOSTLY DONE IN A WRITTEN MODE d. *TOULOUS ARGUES WITH TEDDY ROOSEVELT!!! IS WHERE WE SEE THE CHANGE!!!!! IN PRESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION OCCURS* 2. *THERES A CHANGE WHERE INSTEAD OF TALKING TO CONGRESSS, THE PRESIDENT GOES OVERRRR THEM AND SPEAKS DIRECTLYYYY TO THE PUBLIC!!!* =TRIES TO MARSHALLS PUBLICS SUPPORT W INDIVIDUAL POLICIES/PROCEDURES a. *AUTHOR SAYS, WE START WITH ROOSEVELT AND THE CHANGE PERSISTS WITH PRESIDENT WILSON!!!! WHO REALLLLLLYYY CEMENTS THIS NOTION OF THE RHETORICAL PRESIDENCY* =WILSON HAS THIS THEORY OF GOV'T THAT FOCUSES MORE POWER ON THE PRESIDENT TO MOVE AMERICAN POLITICS b. *WE SHIFTEDDD THE PRESIDENTS ROLE FROM BEING HEAD OF STATE TO A CONSTANT CAMPAIGNER GETTING SUPPORT!! FOR DIFFERENT POLICIES* PRESIDENT = HEAD OF STATE >>>> A CONSTANT CAMPAIGNER 3. *HOW EFFECTIVE IS THE RHETORICAL PRESIDENCY???* a. *IN SOME WAYS, IT DEPENDS ON HOWWWWW U WANNA MEASURE IMPACT* b. *IF YOU WERE TO LOOK AT PRESIDENT JOHNSON'S SPEECHES ON CIVIL RIGHTS, HEEE SEEMS TO HAVE A POLITICAL IMPACT* c. *SCHOLAR NOTES THAT WITH EACH PASSING ADMINISTRATION THAT THE NOTION GETS CEMENTED MORE AND MORE* 4. *WHAT THE PRESIDENT SAYS IS OFTEENNN NEWSWORTHY!! THEREFORE, THEY CAN HELPP SHAPE THE MEDIA AGENDA!!!! (AGENDA SETTING)* a. *CONSIDER THE STORY OF TEDD ROOSEVELT WHERE HE KNEWWW THAT THE GOV'T TEND TO SHUT DOWN ON THE WEEKENDS* =BC PPL USUALLY HAVE WEEKENDS OFF b. *AND SO ASSS A RESULTTT,,, MONDAYS TENDED TO BE SLOWWWW NEWS DAYS* c. *SOOOO ROOSEVELT OFTEN MADE ANNOUNCEMENTS ON SUNDAYS!!! IN ORDER TO BE PROMINENTLY FEATURED ON MONDAYS* d. *ROOSEVELT HAD AN UNDERSTANDING THAT SOMETIMES WHEN DEALING WITH MEDIA AGENDA JUST HAD TO DO MORE W ORGANIZATIONAL ROUTINES* =CLAIMED THAT HE "DISCOVERED MONDAYS" 5. *PRESIDENTS ALSO USED COMMUNICATION AS A WAY OF FOCUSING ATTENTION AAWWWAAYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!! FROM ISSUES!!!* a. *CONSIDER THE EXAMPLE OF NIXON* NIXON DURING THE WATERGATE SCANDAL!!! HE TRIED TO TALK MORE ABOUT FOREIGN POLICY TO DIVERT ATTENTION AWAY FROM HIS SCANDAL b. *CONSIDER ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF CLINTON* CLINTON DURING LEWINSKY SCANDAL TRYIED TO SHIFT ATTENTION AWAY 6. *IN GEORGE EDWARD'S BOOK, "DEAF EARS", HE SUGGESTS PRESIDENTS HAVE LIMMMITTTEDDDDDD!!!! EFFECTS!!!! IN SWAYING PUBLIC OPINION!!* a. *BUT ITS REALLY KIND OF HOWWW DIRECTLY HES MEASURING IT* b. *A LOT OF RHETORICIANS RESPONDED!!!! TO HIS BOOK BY SAYING THE RHETORICAL PRESIDENCY IS SUCCESSFULLL BUUUT CANT BE NECESSARILY SUCCESSFUL IN SPECIFIC SURVEY MEASURES* =ITS NOT THAT THE PRESIDENT IS GONNA SEE A TEN POINT MOVE IN PUBLIC OPINION POLL FOLLOWING A SPEECH ON A GIVEN ISSUE c. *RHETORICIANS WOULD INSTEAD SAY, THE PRESIDENT IS ENGAGING IN CONSTITUTIVE RHETORITIC* -THEY.... =DEFINE IDEAS =PRIME ISSUES =FRAME DEBATES ^^THOSE SORT OF SECOND ORDER, BIGGER ISSUES ----------------------------------- OVERALL THERE'S CERTAINLY CONTINUING DISCUSSION!!! ABOUT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE RHETORICAL PRESIDENCY =BUT HAS HE SAID, WE SEE EACH PRESIDENT TALKING MORE AND MORE WHEREAS HISTORICALLY, UP UNTIL THE 20TH CENTRUY, THE ROLE OF THE PRESIDENT WOULDVE BEEN FOCUSED ON MOREEE WRITING //WORKING MORE DIRECTLY W CONGRESS =THE RHETORICAL PRESIDENCY SHIFFTSSS THAT TO BECOME MORE OF A CONSTANT CAMPAIGNER, SPEAKING DIRECTLYYY MROE TO THE PEOPLE!!! AND TRYINGGGG TO USEE THEMM TO BULLY PULPIT!! TO MOVEEEE ISSUES///AGENDA bully pulpit: a public office or position of authority that provides its occupant with an outstanding opportunity to speak out on any issue. AUTHOR TOULOUS WOULD SUGGEST THAT SHIFT IS A PRETTY DEFINING MOMENT IN THE 20TH CENTURY

THE RHETORICAL TRADITION TOPIC SUBSECTION: SOPHISTS

•*SOPHISTS BACKGROUND* 1. *THIS TERM IS AN IMPORTANT WAY OF UNDERSTANDING THE BACKGROUNDDD!!!! OF ANCIENT RHETORIC IN ATHENS!!* 2. *REALLY HARD TO GENERALIZE PEOPLE WHO HAVEEE BEEN CALLED SOPHISTS!!* a. *THEY DDIDDDNNTTTTTTT EXIST AS A GROUP* =THATD BE EQUIVALENT TO SAYING "COACHES" 3. *SOPHISTS DESCRIBE A VERY BROADD!! AND GENERAL!!! APPROACH!!!* a. *VERY FEW PPL WOULD CLAIM THE MANTLE!! OF SOPHIST* b. *ITS A CONTESTED TERM* --------------------------------------------- •*WHO WERE SOPHISTS???* =AKA WHAT DO SOPHISTS DO??? 1. *SOPHISTS WERE TEACHHERSSSS!!!!1 OF RHETORIC!!!!* a. *WERE BASICALLY PEOPLE WORKING IN THIS REALM OF TEACHING SPEECH!!!!! AND THE EFFECTIVENESS!! OF SPEECH!!* b. *CONSIDER THIS SECTION FROM THE CLOUDS: "BOLD, HASTY, AND WISE, A CONCOCTER OF LIES. A RATTLER TO SPEAK, A DODGER, A SNEAK. A REGULAR CLAW AT THE TABLES OF LAW, A SHUFFLER COMPLETE, WELL WORN IN DECEIT, A SUPPLE, UNPRINCIPLED, TROUBLESOME CHEAT; A HANG-DOG ACCURST, A BORE WITH THE WORST, IN THR TRICKS OF THE HURT-COURTS, THROROUGHLY VERSED"* =THATS WHAT ARISTOCLES SAYS ABOUT SOPHISTS =IF SOMEONE WHO UNDERSTANDDDDS TACTICS =THSI SI JUST ONE PERSPECTIVE THO 2. *THERE WERE THREEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!! MAIN FUNCTIONS!! THAT SOPHISTS DO!!!!!* a. *MAYBE THEY DID ALL THREE FUNCTIONS, MAYBE THEY JUST FOCUSED ON ONE FUNCTION* b. *FUNCTION #1: TEACHERS!!!!* =SOME WOULD OPEN UP SCHOOLS!!! TO OFFER CLASSES/WORKSHOPS ON SPEECH! =A LOT OF TIMES MINOR SOPHISTS WOULD RUN SCHOOLS =A LOT OF TIMES MAJOR SOPHISTS END UP ESTABLISHING!! SCHOOLS!! -IE: ISOCRATES WAS CALLED A SOPHIST BY SOMEEE (however he didnt call himself one) ISOCRATES HAD A SCHOOL!!! AND HE TAUGHT PPL TO BECOME POLTIICAL LEADERSE!! THEY WERE STUDYING SPEECHES c. *FUNCTION #2: WRITER!!!!* =SOMETIMES THEY WOULD WORK AS A WRITER =SOMETIMES WOULD BE CALLED A "LEGOGRAPHER" =RECALL, PPL WOULD DEFEND THEMSELVES IN COURT AND SOMETIMES THEY WOULD WANT TO BASICALLY WRITE THEIR SPEECH FOR THEM =THEY HAD TO LOOK AS THOUGH THEY WERE PERFORMING IT THEMSELVES -IE: THE ANCIENT ORDER, DEMOSTONIES,HE DEFENDED HIMSELF, MADE HIS OWN SPEECHES, ODDS ARE, HE WOULD DO HIS OWN SPEEHCES AS WELL d. *FUNCTION #3: PERFORMER* =WOULD ALSO DO PUBLIC PERFORMANCES! =OFTEN THIS WAS A FORMM OF SELF-PROMOTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -IE: GORG-GEOUS, SOMETIMES THE BEST KNOWN OF WHAT WE WOULD CALL THE SOPHIST, WOULD OFTEN SPEAK ON ANY SUBJECT!! (SOMETIMES IMPROMPTU WORK!!) AND HE'D SAY "OH GIVE ME A SUBJECT" AND HE'D SPEAK ON ANY SUBJECT!! WOULDLVE DONE THIS AT THE THEATER OR THE OLYMPICS. ALSO RAN A SCHOOL !!!! =SO SOPHISTS TYPICALLY DO THOSE THINGSS^^^ =THEY INVEST IN COMMUNICATION =THEY DO PUBLIC PERFORMANCES TO DEMONSTRATE THEIR SKILL!!!! =ODDS ARE, MAYBE THEYD DO SOME WRITING ON THE SIDE =MAYBE THEYD TEACH !!!! PPL 3. *OVERALL, (SOMETIMES) ITS THE COMBINATION OF THOSE CERTAIN FUNCTIONS/ACTIVITIES THAT CLASSIFY WHETHER SOMEONE IS INVESTED IN STUDYING!!! OR TEACHING!! SPEECH!!* =SOMETIMES AKA THEY MIGHT ONLY DO ONE OR ALL THREE FUNCTIONS 4. *WHAT SOPHISTS WOULD TEACH!!!!!!!!* a. *IT VARIED!!!! BY THE PERSON!!! AND WHAT THEIR SKILL WAS!!!!* =SOME PPL WOULD DEVELOP THEIR SYSTEM -IE: GORG-GEOUS WAS SOMETIMES WELL KNOWN FOR STYLE!!!! (THIS VERY ORNATE STYLE!!!) THAT WAS HIS CALLING CARD b. *EFFECTIVENESS!!!!!! WAS A THEME!!!!!!! FOR EVERYTHING IN TEACHING!!!!, DESPITE IT VARYING IN WHAT SOPHISTS TAUGHT!!* =AT THAT POINT, THERE WASSNTTTT A SINGLE, CODIFIED TRADITION OF RHETORIC =SINCE MOST PPL HAD TO DEFEND THEMSELVES IN COURT, NOT EVERYONE WAS GONNA BE SPEAKING IN THE ASSEMBLY!! =ITS A LOT BAOUT EFFECTIVENESS IN COURT!! =U HAD TO BE ABLE TO KNOW WHATTT THE JURY MIGHT BE LOOKING FOR OR HOW TO MAKE A CASE c. *TRAINING!!!!! W A SOPHIST COULD BE EXXXPENNNNNSIVVVEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!* =SOME SOPHISTS MADE BANK ! =THEY WOULD MAKE LIKE$10,000 FOR A TEN LECTURE SEMINAR (in modern currency) =WOULD TEACH LOTSS OF PPL!! d. *MANY SOPHISTS TAUGHT BY IMITATION!!!!!!!!!!* =SO THEY HAD THEIR STYLE!! OF TEACHING =THEY WOULD WRITE THEIR SPEECHES, HAVE THEIR STUDENTS PRACTICE WRITING!!!! IN THEIR STYLE AND PRACTICE DELIVERING!!!!! IN THEIR STYLE!!!!!! e. *SOPHISTS TAUGHT FOR MONEY!!!! THEREFORE, ANYONE (WITH MONEY1!!!) COULD LEARN!!!* =A LOT OF EDUCATIONAL SYSTEMS IN ATHENS PRIOR TO THIS POINT IS A LOT MORE APPRENTICE BASED =SINNNNCEEEEEEEE THERE WAS A RISE IN MIDDLE CLASS THATS WILLING TO PAY FOR THESE SORTS OF LESSONS, THEN THERE WAS A LOT OF GOOD SCHOLARSHIP THAT TALKS ABOUT HOWWW THE PUSHBACK AGAINST SOPHIST WAS THE PUSHBACK AGAINST A MIDDLE CLASS BEING ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE LEARNING THAT HISTORICALLY ONLY THE ARISTOCRACY WOULD HAVE =SO IF ANYONE HAD MONEY, THEY COULD LEARN THIS STUFF d. *ONE OF PLATO'S CHIEF CONCERNS WITH RHETORIC!! AND SOPHISTS!! IN GENERAL WAS THAT, YOURE SEEING A MIDDLE CLASS BEING ABLE TO PERFORM THE ROLE OF ARISTOCRACY!! AND THATS NOTTT PARTICULARLY GOOD!!* e. *WHILE SOME!!!!! WOULD FOCUS ON SPEECH, OTHHHERSSSS MIGHTVE CLAIMED TO TEACH A FORM OF ARÊTE!!!!!* =*RECALL HOW THIS WAS VERY BASED ON THE INDIVIDUAL SOPHIST* -*ARÊTE:* AS A CONCEPT, IT TRANSLATES TO VIRTUEEE!! (NOT VIRTUE IN FORM OF MORALITY BUT INSTEAD, PERSONAL EFFECTIVENESS!!) AKA TRAITS OF A LEADER!! -IE: LIFE COACH =AGAIN, THIS WAS TROUBLING TO PLATO AND OTHER ARISTROCATES AS IT WAS PASSING ONESELF OFF AS MOREE ELITEE!! THAN THEY ACTUALLY WERE =THIS NOTION OF ARÊTE IS MAPPED OUT IN VARIOUS WAYS f. *ARÊTE!! COMES OFF AS VIRTUE!!!!!!!!! OR EXCELLENCE!!!!!!!!!!* =AKA THE CONCEPT COMES OFF AS THIS HEROIC EXCELLENCE!! =BEING ABLE TO ACT GRANDLY!!! AND NOBLY!!! =CERTAINLY, ITS TALKED ABOUT IN TERMS OF ATHENIAN GREEK!! ATHLETIC COMPETITIONS!!! =BEING ABLE TO PERFORM!! THE ACTION EXCEPTIONALLY WELL!!! -IE: BATTLES HAVE THIS NOTION OF HEROIC ARÉTE!!!! THIS VIRUTUEE AND EXCELLENCE THATS BESTOWED BY THE GODS TO INDIVIDUALS!! g. *SO IF SOMEONE (SOPHISTS) COMES ALONG AND CLAIMS THEY CAN TEACH ARÊTE, AND MAYBE TEACH IT IN A WAY WHERE U JUST LOOK!!! LIKE U HAVE ARÊTE INSTEAD OF ACTUALLY HAVING IT, THENNN THATS POTENTIALLY DISRUPTIVE!!!!!!!* ----------------------------------------- OVERALL THOSE ARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS AROUND SOPHISTS!! AGAIN, WE CAN LOOK BACK AND SAY THEY WERE TEACHERS AND WRITERS AND PERFORMERS OF RHETORIC AND SPEECHES -*WHY WE USE THE TERM, "SOPHIST":* SOPHIA IN GREEK IS LOVE OF WISDOM!! A SOPHIST IS SOMEONE WHO IS A WISE PERSON!! BUT SOMETIMES THIS LABEL IS APPLIED VERY DERISIVELY!!!!! (AKA "HES A WISE PERSON BUT HES ACTUALLY NOT") HES JUST A PERSON WHO TEACHERS BASE TECHNIQUES TO PASS OTHER CLASSES OFF AS THEYRE ELITE =SOPHISTS ARE THIS IMPORTANT EARLY TEACHER!! =RREALLY THE EARLIEST PROFESSIONAL TEACHERS WE HAVE BC THEYRE TEACHING FOR MONEY =BUT HTIS TERM IS IMORTANT BC IT HELPS US DETERMINE THIS ANCIENT TERM OF RHETORICI IN ANCIENT ATHENS =ANDD BC SOPHISTS THEMSELVES ARE THIS BCKGROUNDD AGAINST WHICH SOME OF THE BIG THINKERS WE TALK ABOUT IN TERMSOF ANCIENT RHETORICAL TRAEIDTON!! *=IN OPPOSITON, ISOCRATES, PLATO, AND ARISTOTLE DEFINE THEMSELVES AGAINNNSTTTT THE SOPHIST!!!!!!!*

THE RHETORICAL TRADITION TOPIC SUBSECTION: THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RHETORICAL TRADITION

•*THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RHETORICAL TRADITION BACKGROUND* 1. *WHEN WE TALK ABOUT RHETORIC, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING BOTTHHHHHH VERY GENERAL!!!!!!!!!!! AND SPECIFIC!!!!!!!* a. *IN TERMS OF.PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION OR SKILLL IN SPEAKING!!* =THIS IS PRESENT IN EVERY CULTURE -THERE ARE SCHOLARLY WORKS THAT TALK ABOUT THE INFLUENCE OF EGYPTIAN ORALTORY!!! ON WHAT WOULD BECOME IMPORTANT TROPES IN A GREEK RHETORIC!!* -CHINA HAS A HISTORY IN COMPLIING GREAT SPEECHES b. *THERES ALLL THESE TRACES!!!!! ALL OV THE WORLD IN HISTORY* 2. *WHAT'S DIFFERENT IN THE GREEK!! RHETORICAL TRADITION IS: (1) THE GREEKS WROTE!!! A LOT ABOUT EFFECTIVE PRESENTATION ANDDDD (2) THEY DESIGNED AN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM!!!! AROUND IT* a. *THAT EDUCATION SYSTEM IS VERY DELIBERATE!! AND METHODOLICAL, THEORETICAL!!* b. *THESE TEXTS!! AND TRADITIONS!! WERE DEVELOPED!! OVER CENTURIES!!!* 3. *ITS IMPORTANT WE GO BACK TO GO LOOK AT THIS INTERESTING PERIOD OF TIME WHEN ANCIENT ATHENIANS/GREEKS WERE STARTING TO WRITE A LOT ABOUT EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION!!! AND THEY WERE STARTING TO TEACH!!! IT* ---------------------------------------------- •*WHAT IS IT ABOUT THIS CENTURY OF ATHENS THAT MAKE THEM SO RIPE!!!! FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT OF RHETORICAL TRADITION????* =WE WILL GO OVER SOME POSSIBLE!!!! THEMES/EXPLANATIONS AS TO WHYYYY THEY WERE -*IMPORTANT NOTE:* ITS A COMBINATION!!! OF THESE NO DOUBT!!!! 1. *THEME/EXPLANATION #1: TRACES IN GREEK WRITING!!!* a. *THERES A HISTORY!!! (LIKE IN OTHER CULTURES) OF ARGUMENTATION!!!! AND PERSUASION!!!!! IN LITERATURE!!!* b. *CONSIDER THE ILLIAD: ODYSSEUS!!! ARGUES PERSUASIVELY!!! THAT ACHILLES SHOULD RETURN TO THE BATTLE!!!!!* c. *CONSIDER BABY HERMES!!!: HERMES IS BORN AND ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS HE DOES IS HE GOES AND STEALS APOLLO'S COWS!!!! AND HERMES LATER DEFENDS!! HIMSELF IN COURT FOR NOTT STEALING THE COWS* d. *OVERALL, THERES LOTSS OF BITS AND PIECES WHERE WE SEE ATTEMPTS!! TO MAP OUT WHAT PERSUASIVE/ARGUMENTATIVE COM LOOKS LIKE* 2. *THEME/EXPLANATION #2: SPEECH OFFERED SOCIAL MOBILITY!!!!* (ways speech offered social mobilities: rising middle class AND being able to secure political and legal power) a. *FROM A SOCIOLOGICAL STANDPOINT, ATHENS IS CHANGING!!!!!: SPEECH IN HELENISTIC SOCIETY, IN GENERAL, OFFERS MOREEEEE SOCIAL MOBILITY* b. *AKA MANYYYYYY HELENISTIC SOCIETIES ARE MOVING MORE FROM A HEAVY ARISTOCRACY!!!!! TO >>>>>> SOMETHING LOOKING A LITTLE MORE LIKE A DEMOCRACY!!!* HEAVY ARTISTOCRACY >>> LIKE A DEMOCRACY c. *HOOWWWWWEVERR, THE SHIFT (FROM ARISTOCRACY TO DEMOCRACY) ISNNTTT TOTAL!!!!* =ITS DEFINITELY DELICATE BETWEEN THE MONEY TO LEADS, THE MASSES d. *THERES DEFINITELY A LOT OF ARISTOCRATIC ELEMENSNTS THAT STILL HOLD ON!!* e. *WAYYY!!! SPEECH OFFERS SOCIAL MOBILITY #1 : THERES A RISING!!!!! MIDDLE CLASS!!!! IN ATHENS* -*WHAT A RISING MIDDLE CLASS GIVES U:* MONEY/LEISURE!!!! ANNNDDD PEOPLE COULD AFFORD INSTRUCTION!!!!!!//EDUCATION!!!! they were able to hire ppl to teach them speech f. *ATHENS ITSELF IS A TRADING PORT!!! AND ITS BRINGING IN LOTSSS OF IDEAS!!! AND MODELS!! OF ELOQUENT SPEECH!! FROM ALL OVER!! THE MEDITERRANEAN!!* g. *WAYYY!!! SPEECH OFFERS SOCIAL MOBILITY #2: BEING ABLE TO SPEAK WELL SECURESSS!! POLITICAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND LEGAL!!!!!!!!!!! POWER!!! or PROTECTING WHAT YOU HAVE!!!* =THIS IS DUEEE TO THERE BEING A SHIFT TO MORE OF DEMOCRACY!!! -IE: THE ASSEMBLY IN ATHENS CONSISTED OF A LOT OF ADULT MALE ATHEN CITIZENS AND ANNNYONNNEEE!!!! AND EVERYONEEE!!!! HAD THE RIGHT TO BE ABLE TO STAND UP AND SPEAK!!!! h. *REALLY, THE ABILITY TO SPEAK WELL!!!!, LEAD, AND ASSEMBLE!!!! MERGE TOGETHER!!!!* i .*NOT ONLY THAT, A MIDDLE CLASS PERSON NEEDED TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK WELL IN ORDER TO DEFEND THEMSELVES IN COURT* =SO IN MANY WAYS, THERE WAS A LOT OF COURT CASES IN WHO OWNED WHAT =THESE COURT CASES WE TRIED IN FRONT OF A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE JURY AND YOU COULD POTENTIALLY LOSE MONEY, CONTRACT LAW, AND THERE ARE NO LAWYERS =IF YOU HAD TO GO TO COURT TO DEFEND ANYTHING, YOU HAD TO BE ABLE TO DEFEND FOR YOURSELF IN ORDER TO DO THAT =NOTES WERE FROWNED UPON, U SHOULD BE ABLE TO SPEAK FOR YOURSELF ELOQUENTLY!! AND YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO IT WITHOUT MEMORIZING IT =ONE OF THE INSULTS AT THE TIME WAS "OH HE WAS UP BURNING THE MIDNIGHT OIL" MEANING U WERE UP ALL NIGHT TRYING TO WRITE THE SPEECH BC UR NOT THAT EDUCATED that as much of an insult now j. *AT THE TIME, THE ABILITY TO SPEAK WELL AND CARRY YOURSELF WELL IN FRONT OF AN AUDIENCE COULD NOTTTT ONLY SECURE POLITICAL POWER BUT ALSO MIGHT HELP YOU SAVEEE MONEY AND NOT LOSE YOUR LAND IN A LEGAL DISPUTE* =THIS WAS MOSTLY TRUE FOR ADULT MALES IN ATHENS, SLAVES AND WOMEN WERENT ALLWOED TO SPEAK 3. *THEME/EXPLANATION #3: INCREASE IN WRITING!!* a. *WHILE RHETORIC REMAINED ORAL (AKA THE ABILITY TO SPEAK), IT COULD BE DISCUSSSSEDDDD!!!!!! AND ANALYZEDDDD!!!!! IN WRITING!!!!* =BEING ABLE TO WRITE STUFF DOWN ALLOWS FOR RHETORICAL HANDBOOKS b. *REALLY, YOU SEE A SORTTTTT OF STUDY!!! OR SCIENCE!!! OF PHILOLOGY!! AND GRAMMAR!!!* =AND SO, MAYBE PRIOR TO THE 5TH CENTURY, LANGUAGE WAS LEARNED AND IMITATED BUT NOTTT STUDIED IN THE SAME WAY WHERE WE CAPTURE IT AND PUT IT ON PAPER c. *SOME OF THE PPL WE'LL TALK ABOUT IS THE EARLIEST TEACHERS OF RHETORIC, LIKE PROTAGORIST!!!* =HE ALSO TRIES TO WORK OUT SOME BASIC STUFF SUCH AS GRAMMAR =HES TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A LIST OF GENDERED NOUNS IN GREEK!! d. *WE'LL ALSO BE LOOKING AT THE WORK OF PROTOCIST!!!* =CLASSIFIES AS A SOPHIST =STUDIES DEFINITIONS e. *INCREASE IN WRITING ALLOWS U TO SLOWWW DOWN AND IDDENNNTIFFYYYYY!!!!!!!! WHAT ARE THE MOVING PARTS AND LANGUAGE!!! THAT ARE WORKING WHEN ITS PERFORMED ORALLY* ------------------------------- OVERALL THOSE R JUST SOME OF THE POTENTIAL FACTORS THAT R COMING TOGETHER TO GIVE RISE WHAT WE CALL THE RHETORICAL TRADITION RHETORICS HAPPEN EVERYWEHRE INTHE WORLD IF WE USE IT TO DESCRIBE EFFECTIVE PERSUASIVE COM, THEERES NO SOCIEITY THAT DOESNNNTTT HAVE IT =WAHT IS PERHAPS DISTINCT ABOUT ANCIENT ATHENS IS, THIS IS A PLACE WHERE WE'RE WRITING ALL OF IT DOWN AND DEVELOPING AN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM AROUNDIT

THE FIRST AMENDMENT TOPIC SUBSECTION: FIRST AMENDMENT HISTORY

•*FIRST AMENDMENT HISTORY* 1. *FIRST AMENDMENT: FREEDOM OF SPEECH, RELIGION, ASSEMBLY, PRESS, AND THE RIGHT TO PETITION* =TODAYYYYY!!!!! WE'LLL SPEEEEECIFCALLLYYY TALK ABOUT FREEDOM OF SPEECH!! AND PRESS!!!1 (NOT religion/right to assemble) 2. *US IS AN INTERESTING CASE!!!! IN TERMS W HOWWW WE MAPPED OUT OUR LAWS AROUND HAVING FREEDOM OF SPEECH* a. *IF WE GO WAY BACK TO COLONIAL AMERICA, A LOT OF THE LAWS THAT ARE GONNA BE GOVERNING US ARE BRITISH LAW* a. *BUT REALLY, IN THE US, DURING HTE 1600S, THERES NOTTTT A LOT OF FREE SPEECH ISSUES* b. *SOME OF THE MOST DOMMINNANNNTTT LAWS AROUND SPEECH IN THE 1600S IN THE US REALLLLYYYYYYYYYYYYY DEALT WITH BLASPHEMY!!* -blasphemy: is saying something concerning God that is very disrespectful -IE: 1616 LAW THAT MAKES IT PUNISHABLEEE BY DEATH!!!!! TOOO DENNYY THE TRINITY (AKA DENYINGGG THE FATHER, SON, AND HOLY GHOST) -IE: VIRGINIA 1646, THEY PUT A LAWWW THAT MAKES IT A CRIME TOOO DENNYYYY THE IMMORTALITY!!! OF THE HUMAN SOUL!!! c. *soo OOOOOOOVERALLL!!!!! WHEN WE GO REALLY FAR BACK, WE LOOK AT LAWS THAT PERTAINNN IN THE US!! TO BLASPHEMY* 3. *CONSIDER THE IMPORTANT!!!!!!!!!!! TERM: PRIOR RESTRAINT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* a. *BUT THEN, EVEN THO THIS IS IMPORTANT IN AMERICAS TRADITION, ALTHOUGH ITS NOT WRITTEN IN AMERICA, WE CAN LOOK AGAINSTTT ONE OF THE EARLIEST ARGUMENTS AGAINST PRIOR RESTRAINT!!!!* b. *PRIOR RESTRAINT REFERS TO WHEN THE GOVERNMENT TRIESSSSS TO PROOHIBBITTTT SPEEECH!!! BEFORE IT GETS OUT!!!!!!!!!!!* -IE: A GOVERNOR SAYS, "WE KNOW WHAT YOU WANT TO SAY, SO WE'RE GONNA SHUT IT DOWN!!! BEFORE U EVEN GET A CHANCE TO SAY IT =-^^THE GOVERNOR DIRECTLYYY INTERVENES ON NOOOTTT JUST OUTLAWING SPEECH AND MAKING IT PUNISHABLE, BUT ALSO BY PROHIBITING THE SPEECH FROM EVEN GETTING OUT THERE!!!!! ---------------------------------------------------- 4. *EARLYYY MOVES IN THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH #1: CONSIDER JOHN MILTON'S AREOPAGITICA!!!! WHICH ARGUES AGGAINSSSTTTTTTTTTTT PRIOR RESTRAINT!!!!! (1644)* a. *IS ANOTHER REFERENCE TO ISOCRATES (an ancient greek rhetorician) WHO WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A WEEK AGO. IS A DIRECT REFERENCE TO ONE OF HIS SPEECHES =ISOCRATES IS AN IMPORTANT THINKER b. *JOHN MILTON HAD RUN INTO ALL SORTS OF TROUBLE BC HE HAD BEEN TRYING TO PUBLISH SOME WORKSS DEFENDINGGGG DIVORCE!!!* =HAD CONSTANTLYYYY RAN INTO ISSUES WITHH PRIOR RESTRAINT!! DURING THIS HIS TIME OF WORK ORRR ATLEAST GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE =HE COULDNTTT PUBLISH AND CIRCULATE THESE WORKS c. *AS ONE OF THE ARTICLE TODAY POINTS OUT, IT USSEDD TO BE REALLLLYYYY EXPENSIVE TO ENGAGE IN PUBLIC SPEEECH AND PUBLICATION* =U HAD TO FIND SOMEONE WILLIN TO PUBLISH IT =IT COST TIME!!!!!! AANDDD MONEEYYY!!!! =YOU HAD TO CIRCULATE IT =ITS A HEAVVYYY LIFT TO GET YOUR WORKOUT THERE d. *MILTON'S ARGUMENT: MAKES AN ARGUMENT TOOO THE GOV'T//THE CALVINISTS IN PARLIAMENT AND TRYING TO CONVINCE THEM THAT YOU SHOULLLDDDDNTTTTTTTT FOCUS SOOO MUCH ON PRIOR RESTRAINT* e. *HES GOT MULTIPLEEEE SUPPORTING ARGUMENTS!! TO BACK UP HIS ARGUMENT:* -*FIRST SUPPORT:* IFF ITS A BAD IDEA, MOST PPL ARE GONNA BE ABLE TO TELL ONCE THEY READ IT (aka prior restraint). SO YOU SHOULDNTTT STOP IT BEFORE IT GETS OUT THERE BC YOURE WORRYING ABOUT NOTHING. most of us can reason and so we can sort out bad ideas f. *SO MILTON'S WORK COMES UP AGAIN AND AGIAN IN SOME OF THE EARLIER CASES AROUND FREE SPEECH* =THIS BASIC ARGUMENT THAT THE GOV'T SHOULDNTTT BE INVOLVED IN PROHIBITNG SPEECH BEFORE IT GETS OUT THERE =FREE SPEECH SHOULD BE OUT THERE AND THE REASONN OF THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO MAKE IT SO THAT BAD IDEAS ARE DROPPED, GOOD IDEAS ARE ENJOYED, AND BAD IDEAS ARE CHALLENGED WITH EVEN BETTER REASON ---------------------------------------------------- 5. *EARLYYY MOVES IN THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH #2: CONSIDER THE ZENGER CASE!!!!!!! WHERE TRUUTHH!!! IS A SPEECHH DEFENSE!!!! (1734)* a. *IMPORTANT CASE IN EARLY AMERICAN HISOTRY* b. *ONE OF THE THINGS GOVERNMENTS ARE REALLY CONCERNED WITH IS: SEDITION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* -sedition: conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch. =CONCERNED W THIS ESPECIALLY WITH THE PUBLICATION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PRINTING PRESS!!! AND MAKING BOOKS MORE AVAILABLE IS..* c. *SEFDITION IS STILL TO THIS DAY THE POTENTIAL ABRDIGEMNETS TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT* -abridgement: a shortened version of a larger work. d. *SEDITION REFERSSSS TO ARGUING FOR REBELLION!!!! AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT* e. *ZENGER!!! WAS A NEW YORK PUBLISHER !!!!!!!!!! WHO HAD A NEWSPAPER!!!!!!!!!!* f. *AT THE TIME, THERE HAD BEEN A NEW COLONIAL GOVERNOR IN NY THAT HAD BEEN SENT TO ENGLAND!!! ANNNDDD ONE OF THE TIHNGS THE GOVERNOR DID WHENH HE ARRIVED IN NY WAS ....* =HE GOT INTO ARGUMENT AFTER ARGUMENT AFTER ARGUMENT WITH THE COLONIAL COUNCIL ABOUT HIS PAY "I WANT MORE MONEY" g. *ZENGER KEPT PUBLISHING THINGS POINTING OUT THE NEW NY GOVERNOR WANTED MORE MONEY!!! SAID THINGS LIKE....* ="OUR NEW GOVERNOR IS A BIT CORRUPT AND KEEPS ASKING FOR MORE MONEY" h. *FINALLY, THE NEW NY COLONIAL GOVERNOR ISSUES A CHARGE OF LIBEL!!!!!!!! AGAINST ZENGER TRYING TO RUIN HIS IMAGE* -libel: a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation =SAID "HE SHOULD BE PROHIBITED FROM SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT ME i. *THE CASE GOES TO COURT!!!!!!!* j. *BTW, ZENGER, UNDER THE EXISTING LAWS AT THE TIME, WAS CLEARLYYYYYY GUILTYYYY* =THE LAW WAS DESIGNED THIS WAY =HE WAS WRITING AGIANST A GOVERNMENT OFFICAL!!! k .*IN COURT...* =HAD TO SWITCH OUT ATTORNEY A COUPLE OF TIMES... =HAD A CORRUPT AFFAIR l. *THE JURY CONCLUDED: NOOOO!!! WE'REEE NNNNNOOOOOTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!! GOING TO CONVICT/PUNISH ZENGER BC YOU CANTT PUNISH FOR PUBLISHING SOMETHING THATS FAIRRR AND TRUEE !* =THE TRUTH BECOMES AN IMPORTANT DEFENSE =NOT ONLY AGAINST DEFAMATION BUT IN MANY FREE SPEECH CASES (this is also, a case of JURY NULLIFICATION which occurs when a jury returns a verdict of "Not Guilty" despite its belief that the defendant is guilty of the violation charged. BC THE LAW WAS PRETTY CLEAR AND THE JURY SAID, "YA WE UNDERSTAND THE LAW. WE JUST DONTTT LIKE IT SO NO!) m. *OVVERALLLLLL, WE GOT THIS EARLY CASE SAYING TRUTTTHHH SHOULD BE AN EARLY DEFENSE!* =IF U R CONVICTED OF SOMTHING, THE GOV'T SAYS THEY DONT LIKE WHAT YOU SAY AND IT TURNS OUT WHAT YOURE SAYING IS TRUE, WELL U SHOULD BE OFF THE HOOK* ---------------------------------------------------- 6. **EARLYYY MOVES IN THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH #3: CONSIDER THE CONSTITUTIONAL! CONVENTION (1787)!!!!!! LEADING TO THE BILL OF RIGHTS!!!! (1791)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* -constitutional convention: The point of the event was DECIDE HOW America was going to be governed. Although the Convention had been officially called to revise the existing Articles of Confederation, many delegates had much bigger plans. a. *AKA so the two squares above are KEY MOMENTS LEADING TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION!!! * b. *SO AFTER THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION, WE'VE GOT THESE ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION WHICH WAS WEAK TO CENTRAL POWER. THIS LEADS UP TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION AS THEY CRAFT THE CONSTITUTIOn* =AND THE ANTIFEDERALISTS IS VERY CONCERNED THAT THIS NEW CONSTITUTION OF A CENTRALIZED AUTHORITY IS GONNA DO SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE TO CIVIL LIBERTIES!! c. *SO THERES QUESTIONS ABOUT RATIFICATION* -ratification: the action of signing or giving formal consent to a treaty, contract, or agreement, making it officially valid. d. *PRESIDENT JAMES MADISON IS CONTRACTED TO WRITE A SERIESSS OF AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUION TO PROTECTT CIVIL LIBERTIES!!!!* =SOME AMENDMENTS GETS PASSED BY CONGRESS =SOME AMENDMENTS GETS PASSED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES e. *BUUUUT, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH VARIOUS STATES FOR RATIFICATION* f. *THE FINALLLLLLLLLLLLL STATE RATIFIES!!! THE BILL OF RIGHTS!!* =VIRGINIA WAS THE LAST TO RATIFY IT IN 1971 g. *SO THATS WHAT HAPPENS, WE'RE BUILDING!!! UP TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT!!!!* ---------------------------------------------------- 7. *WHAT IS THE ACTUAL FIRST AMENDMENT????????* a. *THE FIRST AMENDMENT STATES: "CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE/EXPRESSION THEREOF; OR ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS; OR OF THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO PEACEABLY ASSEMBLE, AND TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES"* b. *WAS FINALLY RATIFIED IN 1971* ---------------------------------------------------- 8. *THE FIRST AMENDMENT WAS CHALLENGED ALMOST IMMEDIATELY!!!!* a. *SO WE'VE GOT THE ALIEN AND SEDITION LAWS!!!! (1798)* =A series of laws known collectively as the Alien and Sedition Acts were passed by the Federalist Congress in 1798 and signed into law by President Adams. These laws included new powers to deport foreigners as well as making it harder for new immigrants to vote. =ARE 3 SEPARATE LAWS THAT ARE REALLYYY AIMED AT MAKING IT HARDER FOR IMMIGRANTS TO BECOME CITIZENS b. *WE HAVE ALIEN LAWS!!! THAT ARE ABOUT MAKING IT DIFFCULT FOR ALIENS TO BECOME CITIZENS =A LOT OF THIS HAS TO DO W THE ADMINISTRATION!!!!! AT THAT TIME!!!! TRYING TO LIMIT WHOS ABLE TO VOTE* c. *WE ALSO HAVE SEDITION LAWS!! THAT REALLY INCREASE UNDER THE CONTEXT OF A FEARED WAR!!!!* =INCREASES THE PUNISHMENT/STRICTENSS ABOUT SEDITION =SO HOW MUCH CAN U ACTUALLY SAY NEGATIVE ABOUT THE GOV'T d. *ALIEN AND SEDITION LAWS ARE VERRYYYYYY UNPOPULAR* e. *THEY NNNEEVVERRRR GO TO A SUPREME COURT CHALLENGE AT ANY POINT* =WE DONT REALLY SEE THE SUP COURT WEIGHING IN HEAVILY ON FIRST AMENDMENT ISSUES UNTIL 20TH CENTURY f. *BUUUT THEYRE ALLOWED TO PHASE OUT* =ALOMOST IMMEDIATELY, THERE ARE SOME SIGNIFICANT FIRST AMENDMENT CHALLENGES THAT HAPPEN LEGALLY! ------------------------------------------ 9. *SO WHAT REALLLYYY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FIRST AMENDMENT AAAASSSSSS IT PEERRTAINNNSS SPECIFICALLY TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH/PRESS!!!!?* =BC LATER ON WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT FREEDOM OF RELIGION/RIGHT TO ASSEMBLE/ETC a. *WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THOSE FIRST AMENDMENT CHALLENGES, WE'RE MOOSTTTLLLYYYYYYY TALKING ABOUT WHENNNNNNN and HOOOWWWWW THE GOV'T!!!!!!!!!!!! CAN RESTRICT PRIVATE CITIZENS!!! (AND NONCITIZENS)!!! PUBLIC COMMUNICATION!!!* =THATS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT^^ b. *ORIGINALLY, THE FIRST AMENDMENT DEALS W CENTRALIZED CONGRESS SHALL PASS NO LAW...... THO THROUGHOUT THE NEXT COUPLE OF HUNDRED YEARS YOUVE GOT THIS PATCHWORK OF STATE LAWS DEALING W FIRST AMENDMENT ISSUES AND VERY MUCH WE START TO SAY "O WE CANT HAVE 50 DIFFERENT LAWS ABOUT FREEDOM FO SPEECH... WE'RE OPERATING W THIS CENTRALIZED NOTION* =SOME GENERALBILITY THERE BUT WE'RE GENERALLY TALKING ABOUT WHATS!!! GOING ON COUNTRYWIDE!!!! c. *ITS ABOUTTT THE GOVERNMENT ON PRIVATE CITIZENS!!* =WE'RE GOING BACK TO THAT AGAIN AND AGIAN d.*THIS IS ABOUT A RRESSTTRICCCTIONNN!!!! ON WHAT THE GOVERNMENT CANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN DOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!* e. *AND ITS NOTTT JUST CITIZENS!!!! IF UR NNOTTTT A CITIZEN OF THE US OR YOURE AN ALIEN AND YOURE ON US SOIL, YOUUU AREEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!! PROTECTED UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT* =BC IT DOESNTTTTT SAY CITIZENS =IF U REFER TO THE ACTUAL TEXT OF IT, IT SAYS "THE RIGHT OF THEE PEOPLE!!!" (not citizens) =^^^THATS BEEN CHALLENGED MANY TIMES ="PEOPLE" REFERS TO PEOPLE WHO ARE ON US SOIL NOTTT CITIZEN STATUS f. *CONSIDER!! THINKING BACK TO THE IIMMIGRATION LAW THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION PROPOSED!!!!!* =IT UNDERWENT A SUPREME COURT CHALLENGE =IT WAS A FIRST AMENDMENT CHALLENGE NOOOOOOTTTTTT ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH BUT ON RELIGION =AND THE ISSUE WAS SAYING "ARE U ESTABLISHING A RELIGIOUS TEST OR TO BEING ABLE TO IMMIGRATE INTO THE US* =WENT TO A SUPREMEM COURT CHALLENGE OF "ARE U ESTABLISHING A RELIGION FOR ADMISSION INT O THE COUNTRY =ENDED UP PASSING ------------------------- OVERALL THATS THE HISTORY/BACKGROUND ON JUST TO GET US UP TO SPEED ON SOME OF INTERESTING QUESTIONS!

PROTECTED AND UNPROTECTED SPEECH TOPIC SUBSECTION: FREE SPEECH ATTITUDES

•*FREE SPEECH ATTITUDES BACKGROUND* 1. *SO WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT CERTAIN LEGAL STANDARDS ON FIRST AMENDMENT ISSUES AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH* a. *THATS FINE!* 2. *BUUUT NOW WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT, IF THATS WHAT THE LAW IS, WHAT ARE THE PUBLICCCCCC ATTITUDES!!! AROUND SOME FREE SPEECH ISSUES* 3. *THE WAY WE'RE GONNA DO THIS: THERE WAS A POLL IN 2017 THAT CAME OUT!!!! AND HAD A LOTT OF WORK PUT INTO FIGURING OUT AMERICANS VIEWS ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH* a. *NOOWW THE POLL ITSELF WAS FROM THE CATO INSTITUTE* =ITS A LIBTERTARIAN POLICY THINK TANK =ITS SUPPORTED BY COKE BROHTERS =IS AN UNBIASED PLACE b. *THE POLLING WEBSITE EARNS A B!!!! FOR HOW RELIABLE THE POLLING WEBSITE IS* =RECALLL HOW THAT CAN DEPEND ON WHO SPONSORS THE POLL c. *WHAT HAPPENED WAS YOUGOV COLLECTED RESPONSES IN 2017 FROM 2000 AMERICANS 18 YEARS OR OLDER* d. *THEY WERE USED TO PRODUCE THIS DATA SET!!* 4. *IN THIS SECTION, WE'LL GO THRU A HANDFUL OF THESE FINDINGS!!!!!* a. *WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT SOME OF THESE ISSUES AND WHAT THEY SHOW* ---------------------------------------------------- •*•*FREE SPEECH ATTITUDES** 1. *FINDING #1: LIBERALS MOST LIKELY TO FEEL COMFORTABLE SHARING POLITICAL BELIEFS!!!!! WHILE CONSERVATIVES MOST LIKELY TO SELF-CENSOR!!!!!* a. *QUESTION: THE POLITICAL CLIMATE PREVENTSS ME FROM SAYING WHAT I BELIEVE* =AGREE OR DISAGREE b. *RESULTS:* -MOST STRONG CONSERVATIVES AGREED!!! and feel like theyre being silenced -MOST STRONG LIBERALS DISAGREED!!!* c. *THAT IS TRUE!!!!* =THERES A BIGGER DIFFERENCE BETWEEN STRONG LIBERAL AND LIBERAL THAN U SEE W STRONG CONVERVATIVE AND CONSERVATIVE IN TERMS OF COMFORT LEVEL 2. *FINDING #2: REPUBLICANS SAY FLAG BURNERS SHOULD HAVE THEIR CITIZENSHIP REVOKED!!!!!* a. *OVERRR HALFFFF OF REPUBLICANS (53%) IN THE SAMPLE SAY FLAG BURNERS SHOULD HAVE THEIR CITIZENSHIP REVOKED!!!!!* b. *MEANWHILE, ONLY 28%!!! OF DEMOCRATS AGREED THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE THEIR CITIZENSHIP REVOKED* c. *OVERALL, DEMOCRATS ARE THE LEASSSTTTT LIKELY TO AGREE OUT OF ALL AMERICANS* =BUT CONSERVATIVES ARE MORE LIKELY 3. *FINDING #3: STRONG LIBERALS SAY ITS MORALLY ACCEPTABLE TO PUNCH NAZIS!!!* a. *QUESTION: IS IT MORALLY ACCEPTABLE TO PUNCH NAZIS?* b. *ANSWERS:* -HALFFF OF STRONG LIBERALS SAY YESS!!! (51%) -LESS THAN HALF OF STRONG CONSERVATIVES SAY YES (21%) c. *SO THATS AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION!!!* =AS WE MOVE FROM SPEECH TO PHYSICAL ACTION =THAT IS THE DISCTINCTION THE SUPREME COURT LOOKS AT (when speech becomes action) 4. *FINDING #4: THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IN THE SAME BELIEVEPPL SHOULDD BE ALLOWED TO EXPRESS UNPOPULAR OPINIONS IN PUBLIC, EVEN THOSE THAT ARE DEEPLY OFFENSIVE TO OTHER PEOPLE* a. *QUESTION: WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING TWO STATEMENTS COMES CLOSER TO YOUR OWN VIEW?* -(A) PPL SHOULDD BE ALLOWED TO EXPRESS UNPOPULAR OPINIONS IN PUBLIC, EVEN THOSE THAT ARE DEEPLY OFFENSIVE TO OTHER PEOPLE -(B) GOV'T SHOULDD PREVENT!! PEOPLE FROM ENGAGING IN HATE SPEECH AGAINST CERTAIN GROUPS IN PUBLIC b. *ANSWER:* =60% SAY A!!!! we SHOULDNT have laws against hate speech =40% SAY B!!! we SHOULD have laws against hate speech c. *ONCE AGAIN, THE DISCUSSION WE HAD UP TO THIS POINT IS ONCE AGAIN WHAT THE LAW SAYS BUUUT IS THAT NECESSARILY WHERE PUBLIC OPINION IS?* 5. *FINDING #5: MAJORITY OF PEOPLE OF COLOR AGREE WITH PEOPLE BELOW!!* a. *QUESTION: DO YOU AGREE WITH PEOPLE WHO DONT RESPECT OTHERS DONT DESERVE THE RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH??* =QUESTION ASKED TO GROUPS OF WHITES, BLACKS, AND LATINOS b. *ANSWER:* -72% OF LATINOS IN SAMPLE AGREEE! -75% OF BLACKS IN SAMPLE AGREE! -46% OF WHITES IN SAMPLE AGREE c. *HATE SPEECH IS AN ACT OF VIOLENCE!!!* =TAHTS A RELEVANT ISSUE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT HATE SPEECH LEGISLATION BC THE COURT HAS ALWAYS DRWN A LINE BETWEEN SPEECH AND ACTION!!! =IS IT GOING TO PROVOKE IMMINENT LAWLESS ACTION? =THEN IT BECOMES CLOSER TO ACTUAL ACTION =IF ITS NOTTTTT THEN IT QUALIFIES PURELY AS SPEECH HERE, ITS NOT A WIDELY SHARED BELIEF AS IT APPEARS 6. *FINDING #6: THE MAJORITY OF PPL IN SAMPLE THINKS HATE SPEECH IS MORALLY UNACCEPTABLE!!!!!* a. *QUESTION: IS HATE SPEECH MORALLY ACCEPTABLE?* =NO GROUPS DEFINED everyone asnwers either y or n B. *ANSWER:* -80% SAY ITS UNACCEPTABLE -19% SAY ACCEPTABLE c. *AGAIN, IT COMES BACK TO HOW WE LEGISLATE THIS IN THE FUTURE* --------------------------- OVERALL WHEN U LOOK AT THAT POLL W THE SAMEPLE, WE DISAGREE SUBSTANTIALLY OVER WHAT COUNTS AS ACCEPTABLE SPEECH =THOSE DIFFERENCES WILL OFTEN LIE AONG POLITICAL PARTY LINES!!! AND RACIAL LINES!! =THISIS IMPORTANT BC IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOT LAWS BUT SHIFTING NORMS AND VALUES, OUR CURRENT FREE SPEECH FRAMEWORK ALLOWS EVERYONE TO HEAR STUFF THAT OFFENDS THEM WITHOUT HAVING TO CHANGEEE THE NATURE OF POLICY =IF WE'RE GONNA ENGAGE IN A SIGNIIFICANT POLICY CHAGNE, THEN TAHTS GONNA REORDER THE LAWS PROBABLY SO THAT THERE ARE SOMME WINNERS AND SOME LOSERS =ITS RELEVANT TO SEE WHERE THERESA A GAP BETWEEN WHATS LEGAL AND WHATS POLITICALLY/PUBLICLY/MORALLY ACCEPTABLE

OVERVIEW OF GLOBAL COMMUNICATION TOPIC SUBSECTION: OVERVIEW

•*GLOBAL COMMUNICATION OVERVIEW*

MEDIA REGULATIONS TOPIC SUBSECTION: HISTORICAL FOUNDATIONS AND REGULATION

•*HISTORICAL FOUNDATIONS AND REGULATION* 1. *RECALL THE US CONSTITUTION: IN SECTION 8, ARTICLE 1, IT GIVES CONGRESS THE POWER TO PROMOTE THE PROGRESS AND SCIENCE AND USEFUL ARTS BY SECURING FOR LIMITED TIMES TO AUTHORS AND INVENTORS THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO THEIR RESPECTIVE WRITINGS AND DISCOVERIES* a. *SOOO IN THE CONSTITUTION, WE RESERVE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS* b. *BUT IN THE CONSTITUTION ITSELF, ITS ALLOCATING POWERS TO CONGRESS* =IT BASICALLY GIVES CONGRESS THE ABILITYYYY TO LICENSE, AND MAKE ILLEGAL COPY RIGHT VIOLATIONS!!* c. *SO FROM THE VERY OUTSET, THERES TENNSIONN BUILT INTO MEDIA REGULATION IN THE US* =ITS NOTTT SIMPLY TEH GOV'T STEPPING AWAY FORM MEDIA REGUALTION 2. *MEDIA REGULATION IS A BALANCE BETWEEN PROTECTING FREE SPEECH FROM GOV'T INTRUSION!!!!!!!!! AND PROTECTING THE PUBLIC INTEREST BY USING GOVERNMENT INTRUSION* =MEDIA REGULATION IN THE US IS VERYYY MUCH ABOUT BALANCE BETWEEN PROTECTING FREE SPEECH FROM GOV'T INTRUSION!!!!!!!!!!!* A. *REMEMBER FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTING PRIVATE!! CITIZENS FROM PUBLIC GOVERNMENTAL INTERFERENCE!!!* =SO YES! THAT IS ONE POLL OF THE REGULATORY DISCUSSION b. *BUT ALSO, IT^^^^ STATES THAT IT PROTECTS PUBLIC INTEREST!! BYYYYYYY USING GOVERNMENTAL INTRUSION!!* =THERES ALWAYS GOING TO BE A BACK AND FORTH ON REGULATION c. *SO EVEN, THE OWNER OF THE BIGGEST COMPANY IN THE US IS NOT GONNA COMPLETELY BE IN FAVOR OF REGULATION BECAUSE THEY REALLY DO LIKE HAVING THE FORCE OF THE GOVT BEHIND THEIR ABILITY TO OWN AND PROTECT THEIR COPYRIGHT AND THEIR LICNESED WORK* 3. *SO IN MANY WAYS, WHAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN IS NOT NECESSARILY IF THEYRE AREE ORR ARENTT REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO MEDIA CONTENT OR OWNERSHIP! OR MEDIA PRODUCTS* a. *ITS NOT WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS REGULATION BUT WHO IS THAT REGULATION BENEFITTING??* =BC USUALLY IN THESE REGULATORY SCHEMES, THEYRE CLEAR WINNERS AND LOSERS b. *AT THE VERY OUTSET WE'RE THINKING ABOUT THIS* 4. *OUR FOCUS IN THIS TOPIC: HOW WE'RE ENGAGING IN THE REGULATION OF MEDIA PRODUCTS!!! AND SO WE GOTTA THINK ABOUT THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (FCC)!!!!* a. *THE FCC WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1934* =AKA SUPERR EARLY ON b. *IF U GO TO THE WEBSITE (FCC.GOV), YOU WONTTTTTTTTTTT FIND A MISSION STATEMENT* =THERES NOT NECESSARILY A SET OF IDEALS THEYRE INTERESTED IN c. *BUT ON THE WEBSITE, IT SAYS.... "THE FCC REGULATES!!!!!! US INTERSTATE AND INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS BY RADIO, TELEVISION, WIRE, SATELLITE, AND CABLE!!!"* d. *STARTING IN 1934 IS WHEN WE SEE THE RISE OF RADIO AND OFC RADIO IS BROADCAST!!! AND ITS AN ISSUE OF PUBLIC CONCERN BC ITS EARLY ON SCENE THAT THE AIRRWAVESS ARE PUBLIC COMMODITY!!* -IE: IF NBC IS GONNA RUN THEIR RADIO BROADCAST IN THE AIR, THATSSSSS THE PUBBLICCCSSS AIR =WE GOTTA MAKE SURE THEYRE USING THAT AIR CORRECTLY =SO ITS A PUBLIC PROPERTY BC WE'RE DEALING W BROADCAST e. *THATS WHY WHEN WE GET INTO STUFF (LIKE WIRE AND CABLE), IT GETS A LITTTLE BIT TRICKIER* 5. *FCC HAS GOTTEN LOTS OF PRESS LATELY BC OF THE DEBATE OV NET NEUTRALITY!!!!!* a. *THERES A LOT OF COMPLEXITY!!! INCLUDED IN THE RANKINGS OF WHOS IN POWER AT THE FCC* b. *THERE ARE 5 COMMISSIONERS THAT SIT AT THE TOP OF THE FCC* =THEYRE ALL POLITICAL APPOINTEES =THEN UNDER THAT U HAVE 2000 OFFICES =THOSE INDIVIDUALS^^ ARE THE ONES WHO ARE MAKING SOME SMALL DECISIONS ABOUT REGUALTION, FINDINGS b. *ITS A POLITICAL APPOINTMENT!!! THEREFORE, CHANGESSSS IN THE FCC MIRROR!!!!!! THAT POLITICAL APPOINTMENT PROCESS* =THAT SAID, ANYTHING THATS COMING OUT OF THE FCC HAS TO GO THRU CONGRESS SO CONGRESS CAN UNDO FCC REGULATIONS (when we get to net neutrality, we'll see its a back and forth in the past 5 years and agian int he past 2 years) c. *SO THE FCC IS THIS REGULATORY ARM* 7. *THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FCC WAS REALLY ABOUT HOWWWW TO REGULATE PRIVATE BROADCASTERS* a. *AKA HOW TO MAKE SURE THAT THEYRE LICNESED!!! AND THAT THEY WERENTT INTERFERING W ONE ANOTHER OR BROADCASTING ON THE SAME WAVES* b. *IT WAS ABOUT PROVIDING OVERSIGHT TO PRIVATE COMPANIES!!!!* 8. *THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY THE SAME CASE AS IT WAS IN EUROPE!!!!!!! WHEN YOU LOOK TO MANY EUROPEAN SYSTEMS, YOU CAN SEE THAT THEY OPTED FOR A DIFFERENT MODEL!!!!!! a. *INSTEAD, EUROPEANS OPTED FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE BROADCASTING MODEL!!!!* -IE: THE BBC IS FOUNDED IN 1922 AND SHORTLY AFTER U HAVE THE FOUNDATION OF THIS BROADCASTIN COMAPNY THATS SET UP TO BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST (ITS PUBLICALLY FUNDED, NATIONAL IN CHARACTER, NONCOMMERICAL FOR A LONG TIME) =A NUMBER OF OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRIES SUCH AS IRELAND ALSOOOOO WENT WITH THIS MODEL =NOTE HOW 1922 IS ALSO EARLY ON HOW LIKE IN AMERICA W THE FCC IN 1934 b. *IF U GROW UP IN AMERICA, THATS IMPOSSIBLE TO IMAGINE* -IE: AMERICA HAS PBS!!! IS CLOSER TO WHAT BRITISH STATIONS ARE c. *IN OPPOSITION, AMERICA HAS A REGULATORY MODEL!!!* =INSTEAD OF PUBLIC SERVICE BROADCASTING MODEL d. *REGULATORY MODEL PRIVILEGES PRIVATE!! COMPANIES* ------------------------------- OVERALL, H THISIS THE BASIC LANDSCAPE US MADE THE DECISION EARLY ON AND ESTABLISHED SOME REGULATORY CONSTRAINTS!!

PROTECTED AND UNPROTECTED SPEECH TOPIC SUBSECTION: IS HATE SPEECH ILLEGAL?

•*IS HATE SPEECH ILLEGAL??? BACKGROUND* 1. *CERTAINLY, THE US IS PERMISSIVE!! WHEN IT COMES TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH* a. *WE ALLOW ALOTTT MORE SPEECH THAN OTHER PLACES* 2. *BIG QUESTION IS, "IS HATE SPEECH ILLEGAL?"* a. *ANSWER: NOOOOO!!!!!* 2. *WHY HATE SPEECH ISSNTTT ILLEGAL* a. *MOST HATE SPEECH IS A FORMMM OF PROTECTED SPEECH* b. *THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTS OFFENSIVE!!!! AND/OR BIGOTED!!!! SPEECH!!!* -IE: IF IT IS A BELIEF ABOUT SOME OSRT OF RACIAL/SEXIST THING, NO MATTER HOW BAD USUALLY YHE 1ST WILL PROTECT IT c. *HOWEVER, THE FIRST DOESNNNTTTT PROTECT EVERYTHING: THE FIRST AMENDMENT DOESNTTTT PROTECT HARASSMENT, THREATS, OR HOSTILE ENVIRONMENTS!!!!!* -IE: SOMEONE WALKIN UP W A GUN AND THEY SAY, "GIVE ME ALL UR MONEY" theyre NOT merely expressing themselves. ITS A THREAT!!!! ^THATS NOT PROTECTED =MOST OFFENSIVE/BIGOTED SPEECH DOESNT ARISE TO THAT LEVEL OF THREAT IN THE EYES OF THE COURT =AND DETERMINING THOSE CASES IS REALLY FIGURED OUT ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS 3. *THE THRESHOLD FOR THAT CONSTITUTES SOMETHING AS ILLEGAL HATE SPEECH* =AKA SPEECH THAT IS HARASSMENT, THREATS, OR HOSTILE ENVIRONMENTS!!!!!* a. *CONSIDER CASE #1: THE COLLIN V SMITH (1978)!!!!!!!* =IN 1978, THERE HAD BEEN A EARLIER COURT DECISION THAT HAD ALLLOOWEDDD A GROUP OF NEO-NAZIS TO MARCH ON THE STREETS OF THE SUBURBS IN ILLINOIS =THAT AREA HAD SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHHHHH NUMBER OF JEWISH FOLKS ANNND HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS =GOES ALL THE WAY UP TO THE SUPREME COURT =*SUPREME COURT SAID YOU CANTTTTT KEEP THE NAZIS OFF THE STREETS ILLINOIS. THEY HAVEEE TO BE ALLOWED TO BE ABLE TO MARCH* =*DESPITE THE NAZIS GIVING HATE/OFFENSIVE/BIGOTED SPEECH, THE SUPREME COURT RULED IT STILLL REMAIN PROTECTED* b.. *CONSIDER CASE #2: SNYDER V PHELPS (2011)!!!!!!!!!!!!* =WESTBORO BAPTIST CHURCH OFTEN PICKETS OUTSIDE OF MILITARY FUNERALS!!!!! =ONE OF THE CASES THAT MADE ALL THE WAY UP TO SUPREME COURT =THEYRE NOTTT IN SUPPORT OF LBGBTQ RIGHTS =THEYRE OFTEN PROTESTIN SPECIFICALLY AGAINSTTTT LGBTQ RIGHTS IN GENERAL AND USE FUNERALLLSSS AS A WAY OF GETTING PRESS! =ISSUE WAS, ITS HATE SPEECH!!!! SHOULD IT BE ALLOWED OUTSIDE OF THESE MILITARY FUNERALS =THE SUPREME COURT RULEDDD IN FAVORRRR OF THE WESTBORO BAPTIST CHRUCH =*DESPITE SIGNS BEING HATEFUL/OFFENSIVE/BIGOTED, THE SUPREME COURT CONFIRMSSS THEIR RIGHTS TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH THAT* =*BCCCC THE CHRUCH DDIDDDNTTTTTT PROMOTE IMMINENT VIOLENCE!!!!* -IMMINENT: . about to happen. =*REMEMBER THATS THE BIG THRESHOLD^^^* THEREFORE ITS SPEECH AND NOT ACTION AND THEYRE NOT HOLLDING A GUN SAYING GIMMIE UR MONEY c. *CONSIDER CASE #3: MATAL V TAM (2017)!!!!!!!!!!* =SIMON TAM IS A MEMBER IS THIS GROUP/BAND AND THEY WANTED TO TRADEMARK THEIR BANDS NAME =NOW THEIR BANDS NAME WAS "THE SLANTS"!!! =THEY GO TO GET TRADEMARED AND THE TRADEMARK OFFICE SAYS, "WE'RE NOTTTT GONNA PROVIDE A PATENT ON THAT NAME BBBCCCC ITS A RRACCIALLLLL SLURRR!!!!!!!!!!* =THEY POINT TO THIS OLD FEDERAL LAW THAT STATES DISPARAGED PERSONS (LIVING OR DEAD), INSTITUTIONS, BELIEFS OR NATIONAL SYMBOLS TO BRING THEM INTO CONTEMPT OR DISREPUTE =BTW, THAT SAME OLD FEDERAL LAW IS WHYYYYY THEY CANCELEDDDD THE WASHINGTON FOOTBALL TEAM, "THE REDSKINS!!!!"'S TRADEMARK BC ITS OFFENISVE =*THE MEMBER OF THE BAND SIMON TAM SAID BAND NAME WAS AN ATTEMPT TO RECLAIM AND TRANSFORM A DEROGATORY TERM!!!* =MAKES THE WAY UP TO SUPREME COURT =*SUPREME COURT WAS IN FAVORRRR OF TAM!!!!!! BC SAID WE CANT GO AROUND PICKING WHICH TERMS WE LIKE AND DONT LIKE THEY ALLOWEDDDDDDDD THE BAND TO TRADEMARK THEIR NAMES AND LIFTED THE CANCELLATION OF REDSKINS PATENT* -------------------------------- OVERALL THAT SPEAKS TO "WELL WEHERE IS THE THRESTHOLD TO HATE SPEECH =REALLY AGAIN, FROM THE COURT SIDE, IT HAS TO BE "ARE WE CREATING THE THREAT OF IMMINENT VIOLENCE???" ^^THATS WHAT THEY BASE IT OFF FROM BUUUUUUT NOW, THIS IS JUST WHATS LEGAL DOESNT MEAN ITS ALSO PUBLICLY PERMISSIBLE =BUUUT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FEDERAL GOV'T'S RESPONSE TO HATE SPEECH, THE ANSWER IS "MOST OF IT QUALIFIES AS PROTECTED SPEECH"

OWNERSHIP AND PUBLIC INTEREST TOPIC SUBSECTION: NET NEUTRALITY

•*NET NEUTRALITY!!!* 1. *WHILE WEVE BEEN LOOKING AT OLDER MEDIA SYSTEMS (OLDER ONES AKA FILM/REGULATIONS FOR THEM/ AND BACK WHEN WE HAD BROADCAST TV AS ONE OF THE ONLY WAYS U WOULD ACCESS A TV SHOW* 2. *NOW, WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT A DECIDEDLY!!! MODERRNNNNNNN!!!! COMMUNICATIONS POLICIIES ISSUE: NETTTT NEUTRALLITYYY!!* 3. *IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND NET NEUTRALITY, ITS IMPORTANT TO THINK ABOUT:* a. *FIRST: HOW POLICY WAS DEVELOPED BEFOREEE THE INTERNET!!!* b. *SECOND: HOW THOSE DECISIONS IMPACTED WHAT ENDS UP BEING POLICY FORRR THE INTERNET* 4. *UP UNTIL THE 1990S, TELEPHONE COMPANIES COULDNTT ENTER THE CABLE TV BUSINESS AND VICE VERSA!!!* a. *THEY COULNTTTT INTEGRATE HORIZONTALLY W ONE ANOTHER* =PHONE COMPANIES COULDNT INTEGRATE HORIZOTNALLY W CABLE AND CABLE COULNDT DO IT W THEM EITHER =U CANT GO BACK AND FORTH 5. *NOW THERE WAS FOR A LONG TIME, A MONOPOLY OF TELEPHONE COMPANIES* a. *CONSIDER BELL TELEPHONE!!!* =OWNED A NUMBER OF SMALLER LOCAL BELLS (THE BELL TELEPHONE SYSTEM) =THEY WERE FORCED TO BREAK UP TELEPHONE COMPANY, MABELL INTO A BUNCH OF SMALLER BELLS b. *THESE SMALLER PHONE COMPANIES WERE THEN ALLOWED TO GET INTO CABLE!!!!* c. *THE FEAR WAS: THERE WOULD BE A SINGLEE WIRE MONOPOLY!!* =SO THAT THERE WOULD BE A COMPANY THAT OWNED EVERYYTHINGGG GOING INTO!! AND OUTTTT!!! OF UR HOME =THERE WOULD BE A SINGLE COMPANY THAT OWNED UR TV/PHONE/INTERNET 6. *THAT MAYY BE THE CASE NOW BUT THAT WAS THE INITIAL WORRY!!1 WHENNN TRYINGGG TO CREATE POLICIES TO LIMIT THAT FROM HAPPENING!!* 7. *ONE OF THE THINGS WE CAN TALK ABOUT (THIS APPLIED TO TELEPHONE COMPANIES) WAS THAT THEY WERE CONSIDERED A COMMMONNNN CARRRIERRR!!!!* a. *DEFINITION OF COMMON CARRIER: A CRUCIAL DEVICE!!!* =IT CHARGES STANDARD RATES!! =THE RATES DONNT VARY b. *CERTAIN SERVICES ARE IMPORTANT TO A FUNCTIONING SOCIETY!!* =THEY HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE ENTIRE PUBLIC!!! c. *AN EXAMPLE TO A COMMON CARRIER: RAILROADS!!* =AGAIN WE THINK BACK TO THE TURN OF THE LAST CENTURY TYPE OF STRUCTURES =THESE KINDA ESTABLISH POLICY GUIDELINES THAT STILL HAVE AN IMPACT ON US =RAILROADS ARE ESSENTIAL TO COMMERCE/TRAVEL//THE COUNTRRY!!! d. *RAILROAD COMPANIES WERE GIVEN SPECIAL ACCESS!!* =THEY COULD LAY TRACKS ON PUBLIC LAND =THEY DIDNTTTTTT HAVE TO OWN THE LAND THEY LAY TRACK ON =THEY HAVE TO CHARGE A STANDARD RATE BUT THATS A COMMON CARRIER!! 8 *TELEPHONE COMPANIES WERE ALSO CONSIDERED COMMON CARRIERS!! AT THE TIME IN THE EARLY 90S* a. *PHONES HAD TO BE CONTENT NEUTRAL!!!!!!! WHICH MEANS YOU CAN CHARGE MOREEE FOR LONG DISTANCE CALLS THAN CALLS WITHIN UR COMMUNITY!!* -IE: IF PPL IN SEATTLE WANNA CALL NY, IT COSTS MORE b. *BUT WITHIN THE LOCAL COMMUNITY, IT WAS CONTENT NEUTRAL TO MAKE A CALL* -IE: IF PPL IN SEATTLE CALLED PEOPLE IN RENTON, IT COSTS THE SAME AMOUNT TO CALL THE MOVIE THEATER IN KENT =IT WAS CONTENT NEUTRAL!! =WHO U CALL DOESNT MATTER JUST AS LONG AS ITS IN THE COMMUNTY 9. *EARLYYYY DIAL UP INTERNET ACCESS WERE ALSOOOO TREATED AS A COMMON CARRIER!!!* a. *AKA EARLY DIAL UP INTERNET ACCESS TREATED ALL CONTENT THE SAME!!* b. *WHY WAS THIS??* =BC BACK WHEN U THINK EARLY INTERNET, IT WAS DIAL UP!!!!!! -IE: when matt first download his first video game, world of warcraft, it made that dialup internet sound THE DOWNLOAD FOR THE DEMO VERSION TOOK LIKE TWO DAYS!! IF SOMEONE WERE TO PICK UP THE PHONE DURING THE DOWNLOAD ITD MESS IT UP BC INTERNET WENT THRU PHONE LINES AT THE TIME c. *THEN THIS CHANGES!!!* d. *WHY IT CHANGED: BC OF CABLE!!!* =WHEN THE INTERNET SHIFTED FROM PHONE LINES TO CABLE, THEN WE'VE GOT A DIFFERENT SET OF RULINGS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF UNEQUAL ACCESS!! =IT REQUIRED A DIFFERENT SET OF RULINGS!!!! BC IT WENT THRU CABLE INSTEAD e. *THE WORRY ABOUT IT WAS: IF CABLE'S NOTTTT A COMMON CARRIER, THEN THERES A CHANCE THEY MIGHT START TREATING COMPANIES IN DIFFERENT WAYS AND WEBSITES IN DIFFERENT WAYS* f. *THIS LEAD TO THE INITIAL DISCUSSION OF NET NEUTRALITY!!!!!* 9. *DEFINITION OF NET NEUTRALITY: NET NEUTRALITY IS THE PRINCIPLE!!! OF NONINTERFERENCE, OR NONDISCRIMINATION, BY INTERNET SERVICE COMPANIES!!, GOVERNMENTS, OR OTHER NETWORK MANAGERS WHO CONTROL THE EXCHANGE AND ROUTING OF DIGITAL DATA!!!* a. *IMPORTANT: NET NEUTRALITY IS A TERM!!! DESCRIBING AN APPROACH TO POLICY RATHER THAN IT BEING A SPECIFIC POLICY!!!!!!* b. *NET NEUTRALITY IS ABOUTT BEING NEUTRAL!!! WITH THE REGARDS TO ONLINE!! CONTENT!!!!* =IF UR ONLINE, UR WATCHING A VIDEO, INFO IS BROKEN DOWN IN DATA PACKETS, AND THOSE DATA PACKETS ARE REASSEMBLED BY YOU!! =NET NEUTRALITY MEANS THOSE DATA PACKETS ARE TREATED BASICALLY ON A FIRST-IN, FIRST OUT BASIS!!!! c. *PROVIDERS!!!!!1 TREAT DATA PACKETS DIFFERENTLLLYYYYYYYY BASED ON THEIR ORIGIN!!!!!!!!! OR THEIR CONTENT!!!!! (what is nature of those data packets)* =THATSSS NET NEUTRALITY 10 .*PEOPLE WHO ADVOCATE FOR NET NEUTRALITY ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE WORRIED ABOUT EITHER BLOCKING!!!! CERTAIN WEBSITES!! ORRR THROTTLING CERTAIN WEBSITES/CONTENT* -throttle: you deliberately make it slower a. *COUNTRIES LIKE RUSSIA/CHINA/IRAN HAVEEE ENGAGED IN THROTTLING OR BLOCKING CONTENT!!* =THERE IS WHERE U GOT GOVERNMENTAL INTERFERENCE WITH REGARDS TO THE NEUTRALITY OF THESE DATA PACKETS! 11: *IMPORTANT NOTE: THIS IS DIFFERENT!!!! FROM CHARGING MORE FOR INTERNET SPEED!!!* a. *WE'RE NOTT TALKING NECESSARILY ABOUT UR CONNECTION SPEED* b. *WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DOESSS THE INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER (ISP) LOOK AT THAT DATA PACKET AND TREAT IT DIFFERENTLY???* c. *THIS IS WHY MATT WANTS TO TALK ABOUT THIS UNDER THE ISSUE OF MEDIA OWNERSHIP/CONSOLIDATION* =BC NET NEUTRALITY SCOOPS UP A LOT OF THESE ISSUES =IT DEALS W MEDIA CONSOLIDATION AND MONOPOLY!! (basically broad band providers have become uncompetitive for households!! so depending on where u live, you have one or two choices for broadband access) =THE ISSUE OF NET NEUTRALITY ALSO DEALS WITH VERTICAL INTEGRATION!! (as u got content providers or conduit providers who are trying to buy content companies) -IE: COMCAST!! IS A CONDUIT COMPANY THAT OWNNSS NBC!!! AND VERIZON!!! (aka nbc's content creation) ^^^^THATS FUNCTIONALLY WHAT NET NEUTRALITY IS!!! AS A TERM!!! 12. *NET NEUTRALITY'S HISTORY IN THE US IS VERY RECENT!!! AND EVERSHIFTING!!* a. *SO IN TERMS OF NET NEUTRALITY, IF WE GO BACK TO THE GEORGE BUSH ERA, THE FCC REALLYYY TRIED TO PASS SOME ANTIDISCRIMATION RULES FOR INTERNET BACK IN 2005!!!* =IT PROHIBITED!!! INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS FROM BLOCKING CONTENT!! b. *THERES A BACK AND FORTH WHERE BROADBAND SERVICE PROVIDERS WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MOREE FREEDOM IN TERMS OF THROTTLING!!!! BANDWIDTH!!* -IE: IF U OWN AN INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER, SOMETHING LIKE STREAMING NETFLIX ISNT SOMETHING DESIRABLE BC IT EATS UP A LOT OF BANDWIDTH MAKKING EVERRYYTHINGG ELSE SLOWERRRR!!! =SO IF U WERE AN INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER, YOUD LOVEEE TO SLOWWW DOWN NETFLIX A BIT IF U COULD c. *SO THERES A DECADE LONG BATTLE OVER NET NEUTRALITY!! AND IN 2015, THE FCC BASICALLY TOOK THE DEFINITION OF NET NEUTRALITY AND GAVE IT FLESH!!!* d. *THAT 2015 FCC RULING REALLY GAVE INTERNET USERS SOME OF THE STRONGEST PROTECTIONS POSSIBLE!!!!!!!!!* =THAT DIDNT LAST FOR VERY LONG e. *IN 2017, THERE WAS A PROPOSAL TO REDUCEEE A LOT OF THE 2015 PROTECTIONS FROM STUPID CHAIRMAN AJIT PAUL* =IT UNDID A LOT OF IT BC IT PASSED lol f. *FOLLOWING THAT, MOST OF THE LARGE BROADBAND PROVIDERS PROMISED NOTT!TT!!! TO BLOCK ANY CONTENT!! BEFORE THE RULING* =THEN AFTER THE RULING, ALL OF MAJOR MOBILE CARRIERS BEGAN SLOWING DOWN VIDEO CONTENT g. *THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF FIGHTING ABOUT IT SINCE TO REGAIN THE PROTECTIONS* h. *HERE IN THE STATE OF WA, WE WERE THE FIRST!! TO PASS THE STATE!! NET NEUTRALITY RULING!!* =THESE ARE BEING CHALLENGED FEDERALLY!! =SAID THAT WE COULDNT MAKE OUR OWN RULES FOR NET NEUTRALITY i.*RECENTLY IN OCT 2019, THERE WAS A CHALLENGE TO REINSTATE NET NEUTRALITY AS A POLICY!!! AND IT FAILEDD IN FEDERAL COURT!!* =SAID THEY WOULD NO LONGGER REGLUATE HIGH SPEED INTERNET "WE'RE NOT GONNA TREAT IT ANYMORE LIKE A COMMON CARRIER j. *WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR US NOW?* =DATA CAPS ARE COMING BACK IN TO FASHION =SOME COMPANIES AREEE PRIVILEGING THEIR CONTENT (not directly but indirectly by bypassing data caps) =SO IF UR ON AT&T, UR ALLOWED TO WATCH DIRECTV!!! WITHOUT HAVING IT IMPACT UR DATA =BUT IF U WANTED TO WATCH HULU OR NETFLIX, IT DOESSS IMPACT UR DATA ------------------------------------ OVERALL THE LAST CHAPTER IS YET TO BE WRITTEN ABOUT NET NEUTRALITY BUT ITS AN ISSUE THAT SPEAKS IN A FUNDAMENTAL WAY TO A LOT OF THESE CONCERSN ABOUT THE ROLE OF FEDERAL REGULATION WITH REGARDS TO COMPANY PRACTICES WITH REGARDS TO COMMINICATION PRACTICES

THE FIRST AMENDMENT TOPIC SUBSECTION: OBSCENITY

•*OBSCENITY BACKGROUND!!!!* -obscene: (of the portrayal or description of sexual matters) offensive or disgusting by accepted standards of morality and decency AND OBSCENITY IS THE STATE OR QUALITY OF BEING OBSCENE!!! 1. *AS WE'RE TALING ABOUT ABRIDGEMENTS, WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT COUNTS AS PROTECTED!!! AND UNPROTECTED SPEECH!!!! UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT!!* 2. *OBSCENITY REMAINDS WHOLELYYYY UUUNNNPROTECTEDDD!!!!!! UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT!!!* a. *ITS CATEGORIES HAVE BEEN RESTRICTED!!! SINCE THE SUPREME COURT RULED ON OBSCENITY!!! LAWS!!!* =BUUUUT OBSCENITY REMAINS UNPROTECTED!!!! b. *NOW, THAT DOESNNTTTTTTT SOLVE THE EQUATION AKA!!!! IT STILL MAKES THINGS CONFUSING!!* =IT JUST MEANS WELL, "WHAT DO WE COUNT AS OBSCENITY???" 3. *WHAT COUNTS AS NOTTTTTTTTTTTT OBSCENITY!!!* =WHAT COUNTS AS OBSCENE AND NOT OBSCENE IS REALLY KINDA THE HISTORY OF SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ON THIS KIND OF STUFF a. *WHATS DOESNTTT COUNT AS OBSCENITY #1: PORNAGRAPHY!!!!!!!!!!* =ON THE VERY OUTSET, WE SEE THAT PORNAGRPAHY AND OBSCENITY ARE NOTTTTT THE SAME THING b. *IMPORTANT NOTE: THERE AREEEEEEEEE SOME TYPES OF PORNAGRAPHY THAT WILLLLLLLLLL BE CONSIDERED OBSCENE!!!!* 4. *WHATS DOESNTTT COUNT AS OBSCENITY #2: INDECENCY!!!!!!!* a. * THEYRE NOTTTT THE SAME THING* b. *INDECENCY IS OFTENNN SOMETHINGS THATS REGULATED BY THE FCC* -IE: in 2004, JANET JACKSON AND JUSTIN TIMBERLAKE DURING THE SUPERBOWL HALFTIME SHOW WHERE HE ACCIDENTALLY FLASHED HER NIPPLE!!!!!!! =^^^^^THEY EVENTUALLY GOT INTO BIG TROUBLE BC ITS A VIOLATION OF INDECENCY!!!! AND SO THE FCC CAN PUNISH INDECENCY!! BBEECAAUSSEE THEYRE IN CHARGE OF THE PUBLIC AIR WAVES!!!! c. *TYPICALLY, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT BROADCAST OR TV, THERE ARE SAFE HARBORS!!!* =SAFE HARBORS ARE NORMALLY THOSE PERIODDSSSS WHERE A LOT OF PPL ARENT USUALLY TUNING IN AT THIS TIME (SPECIFICALLY CHILDREN!) AND SO YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT MOREEE FREEEEEEDOM IN WHAT U CAN SHOW ON PUBLIC AIR WAVES -IE: MATT HAD A MOVIE CRITIQUE SHOW IN COLLEGE THAT PLAYED DURING SAFE HARBOR HOURS!!!!! THERE WAS A SHOW AFTER HIS WHERE BOOBS WERE SHOWN!! what he would do is he had interesting political views to say the lesast. he thought that no one would sit around to lsiten to him rant! so what he did was he found all these viodes of topless women. OVERALL,,,, YOU COULDDDDD SHOW BARE BREATS ON CABLE TV LATE AT NIGHT ------------------------------------------------- •*OBSCENITY!!!* -obscene: (of the portrayal or description of sexual matters) offensive or disgusting by accepted standards of morality and decency AND OBSCENITY IS THE STATE OR QUALITY OF BEING OBSCENE!!! 1. *OBSCENITY IS THIS VERRRYYY SPECIFICCCCCC NOTION!!!!!!* 2. *ONE CASEEE THAT WILL HELP US UNDERSTAND OBSCENITY LAW: ROTH V. US (1957)!!!!!* a .*SAMUEL ROTH RAN THIS BUSINESS IN NY AND HE WAS A CONVICTED FOR SENDING OBSCENE!!! MATERIALS THRU THE MAIL!!!!!* =WHAT HE DISTRUBUTED WAS THIS PUBLICATION CALLED "AMERICAN APHRODITE"!!!!! =AND IT HAD LITERARY EROTICA! and NUDE PHOTOGRAPHY!!! b. *HE EVENTUALLY GETS IN TROUBLE FOR IT!!! AANDDD IT GOES TO THE SUPREME COURT!!!!!!* c. *AS THEYRE HEARIN THE CASE, ONE OF THE DOMINANT TRENDS THAT COME OUT OF IT IS: BEFORE THE THIS CASE, THERE HAD BEEN THE HINKLIN TEST!!! FOR OBSCENITY!!!* =THE HINKLIN TEST/PREVIOUS CASE SAID, "ARE THERE BITS AND PIECES OF THE MATERIAL THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED OBSCENE?? aka not all of it d. *WELL, THE ROTH CASE COMES OUT AND THE BIG TEST FOR OBSCENITY IS: "WHETHER TO THE AVERAGE PERSON, APPLYING CONTEMPORARY COMMUNITY STANDARDS, THE DOMINANT THEME FO THE MATERIAL TAKEN AS A WHOLE APPEALS!!!! TO THE PRURIENT INTEREST//SEXUAL DEPICTION!!!!* f. *SO!! DOMINANT THEME BECOMES IMPORTANT!!!!* =IF IITS NOTTT JUST AN EPISODE OF SEXUAL CONTEXT!!!!! =IT IS THE DOMINANT THEME! 3. *THIS KINDA SHIFTS HOW WE TALK ABOUT OBSCENITY!!!!!* a. *IS IT PRIMARILY!! OBSCENE????? ORRRR IS IT ONLY A BIT OBSCENE??????* =THAT GOES FOR AWHILE b. *ITS A MUCH BROADER DEFINITION OF OBSCENITY!!!* c. *ALLSOO APPLIES TO PORNAGRPAHY!!!* =ALLOWS IT FOR A BIT 4. *THEN IN 1973, THE MILLER TEST COMES OUT!!!!!! (FROM MILLER V CALIFORNIA CASE!!!)* a. *AGAIN IN THIS CASE, IT WAS SOMEONE DISTRIBUTING!!! PORNAGRAPHY!!!! THRU THE MAIL!!!!* b. *MELVIN MILLER IS THIS GUY AND HE RUNS A MAGAZINE DISTRIBUTION!!!! AND THEY SELL PORNOGRAPHIC MATERIALS!!!* c. *THE REASON FOR THE CASE: THE PORNAGRAPHY HE SENT THRU THE MAIL WAS UNSOLICITED!!!!!* -unsolicited: not asked for =THIS GUY, WHO RECEIVED ONE OF MILLERS UNSOLICITED BROCHURES!! IN CALIFORNIA!!!! d. *SOOO, MILLER IS PROSECUTED UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW!!!!! THAT MAKES IT A MISDEMEANOR TO KNOWINGLY SEND OBSCENE MATERIAL!!* e. *SO, IT GOES TO THE SUPREME COURT!!!!* f. *WHAT BECOMES ONE OF THE DOMINANT TESTS IS: THE MILLER TEST FOR OBSCENITY!!!* =THE TEST EMERGED FROM THE CASE g. *THE THREEEEE STANDARDS OF THE MILLER TEST ARE:* -*FIRST:* WHETHER THE AVERAGE PERSON APPLYING CONTEMPORARY COMMUNITY!!!!!!!!!! STANDARDS!!!!! WOULD FIND THE WORK!!!, TAKEN AS A WHOLE, APPEALS TO THE PRURIENT INTEREST; -*SECOND:* WHETHER THE WORK DEPICTS!!! OR DESCRIBES!!!! IN A PATENTLY!!!!! OFFENSIVE!!!! WAY, SEXUAL CONDUCT SPECIFICALLY DEFINED BY THE APPLICABLE STATE LAW; AND -*THIRD:* WHETHER THE WORK TAKEN AS A HWOLE LACKS SERIOUS LITERARY, ARTISTIC, POLITICAL, OR SCIENTIFIC VALUE!!!* =scientific value is more restricted than social value h. *WHATS RELEVANT ABOUT THE THREE STANDARDS!!!! IN THE MILLER TEST!!!!!!: BASICALLY, YOU CANNNTTTTTTTTTT HAVE (AS IT APPLIED TO THE MILLER CASE) TWOOO VERY DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES APPLYING STANDARDS!!!! annndddddddd IT HAS TO BE PATENTLY OFFENSIVE!!! TO THE AVERAGE PERSON (not most sensitive person)* =YOU'VE GOTTTT TO HAVE FLEXIBLE STANDARD BY WHICH YOURE EVALUATING PORNOGRAPHIC MATERIAL TO DETERMINE IF ITS OBSCENE!!! if ur gonna do it across states =YOU CANT START CALLING SOME MATERIAL OBSCENE JUST BC SOMEONESSS OFFENDED.... i. *THE MILLER TEST CONTINUES TO BE APPLIED* 5 .*AND, IF YOURE THINKING ABOUT COMMUNITY STANDARDS FOR THIS, HOW DO WE DEAL W THAT IN AN INTERNET ERA???* a. *THE CHILDRENS INTERNET PROTECTION ACT (2000) IS TRYING TO GRAPPLE W SOME OF THESE ISSUES W HOW TO DEAL W ONLINE PORN IFFF SOMEONE WHOS HOSTING A SERVER IN NORTH DAKOTA IS SERVING UP SOMETHING SOMEBODY OVER IN TALLAHASSEE FLORIDA FINDS OFFENSIVE!!* b. *TEHREFORE, COMMUNITY STANDARDS GET A LOT MORE COMPLICATED WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT ONLINE DISTRIBUTION!!!!* -------------------------------------------- OVERALL OBSCENITY AND PORN ARE NOTT THE SAME THING =OBSCENITY IS NOOOTTT PROTECTED =BUUUT A LOT OF PORNAGRAPHY ISSNTTT CONSIDERED OBSCENE ITS A DIFFCIULT ISSUE THAT GETS MAPPED OUT MORE AND MORE BIG QUESTION STILL IS:: WHAT COUNTS AS OBSCENE

OVERVIEW OF MEDIA INSTITUTIONS

•*OVERVIEW OF MEDIA INSTITUTIONS* 1. *MATERIAL IS DIFFERENT FOR THIS SECTION!* 2. *WHAT WE'LL FOCUS ON IN THIS OVERVIEW OF THIS WEEK:* -HOWWWW THE TWO MAJOR ELEMENTS THIS WEEK GO TOGETHER!!!! AND -HOWWW YOU SHOULD BE THINKING THRU THE MATERIAL THIS WEEK 3. *THIS WEEK....* a. *WE GO THRU 4 DIF MODULES!!! BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT MEDIAAA INSTITUTIONS* =IS A VERY BROAD TERM 4. *WHENNN PEOPLE APPROACH MEDIA INSTITUTIONS, THEYRE LOOKING AT KINDA ENTERTAINMENT!! CONTENT!! ORRRR NEWS!!!! CONTENT IS PRODUCEDDD!!!! AND CONSUMED* a. *SO IT REALLY BRINGS TOGETHER A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT FACTORS* WE MOVE FROM HISTORY AND INDIVIDUALS!! ALL THE WAY TO THE MOST CONTEMPORARY ISSUES!! AND POLICY!!! b. *SO WE'LL BE BOUNCING AROUND THESE DIF ISSUES AND INFORM ONE ANOTHER THROUGHOUT THIS WEEK* 5. *THE MATTERS WE'LL LOOK AT INCLUDE....* -US LAW -THE FIRST AMENDMENT -CASE LAW a. *FIRST AMENDMENT ISSUES SETTTTT THE BOUNDDARRRRYYY!!!!! FOR.....* -WHAT INDIVIDUALS CAN DO!!!!!! ANDD -WHATT JOURRNALLISSTS!!!! CAN DO 6. *THEREFORE, WE'LL BE TALKING A LOT ABOUT JOURNALISTIC ISSUES!!!! WITHINN THE CONTEXT OF MEDIA INSTITUTIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* a. *ITS NOTTT JUST SIMPLY RUNNING A NEWSPAPER OUTTA YOUR BASEMENT!!* =ITS HOWWW NEWSPAPERS OPERATE IN PART OF A MAJOR MEDIA INDUSTRY!!!*M b. *SO THEREFORE, WE'LL LOOK AT....* -FIRST AMENDMENT AND HOW IT DETERMINES JOURNALISTS DECISIONS!!! -HOWW FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS AN ISSUE EXPERIENCED BY INDIVIDUALSSS!!!!! aaanddddd BY JOURNALISMMM INSTITUTIONS!!!!!!!! c. *^^^^BUUUUT NOT JUUSST IN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LAW, BUT ALLLSOOO....* WITHIN THE BOUNDARIESS OF....* -POLICY!!!!!!!! -PRIVATE BUSINESSES -PUBLIC BUSINESSES (governed more by the government) 7. *ANDDD THENNN WE START TALKING ABOUT MATTERS OF REGULATION!!!* a. *SO NOT NECESSARILY MATTERS OF LAW AND FREE SPEECH, BUT WHENN THE GOVERNMENT SAYS "WELL WE HAVE TO REGULATE CERTAIN INDUSTRIES FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST!* b. *AS WE'LL SEE, THIS COMES TO MEDIA INDUSTRIES FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF "IF IVE GOT RADIO SIGNALS AND UNLESS I HAVE GOOD REGULATION, TWO RADIO SIGNALS NEED TO BE ORGANIZED IN ORDER TO WORK* =RATHER THAN WORK ON THE SAME BAND c. *AAGAINNNN, THE SAME ISSUES POP UP UNDER THIS MATTER....* -FREEDOM OF SPEECH -ROLE OF INSTITUTIONS -ROLE OF JOURNALISM 8. *FINALLY, WE END ON MUCH MORE OWNNERSHIPPP!!!!! AND PUBLIC INTEREST!!!!!!!* a. *SO WHAT ARE THE RULESSS AND GUIDELINES IN THE US ABOUT WHO CAN OWN WHAT* -IE: HOW MANY TV STATIONS CAN U OWN IN A GIVEN MARKET b. *WITH THIS, WE END ON NET NEUTRALITY!!!!!!* =A VERY CONTEMPORARY ISSUE ---------------------------------------- OVERALL, ITS REALLY ABOUT HOWWW ALL OF THESE ISSUES INFORM ONE ANOTHER WE START WITH THE HISTORY AROUND LAWS OF WHAT U CAN SAY IN PUBLIC W/O FEAR OF GOV'T TROUBLE ANDDDD WE ENDDD IN REGULATION OF HOW POLICY ENABLES ACCESS!!! TOOO THAT VERY SAME TYPE OF SPEECH SOOOOOOOO ALLL OF THESE ISSUES INFORM ONE ANOTHER =THERES NO KEY TERM HERE LIKE HOW ITS INTRODUCED IN OTHER OVERVIEW VIDEOS, BUT MATT WANTS TO STATE HOWWW ALL OF THESE IISSUES IINNNFOORMMMMMMM ONE ANOTHER =WHAT WE RENDERED IN TERMS OF PRECEDENT ON FIRST AMENDMENT LATER COMES UP WHEN WE TALK ABOUT CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM AND WHAT CONSTITUTES LEGAL SPEECH =WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ISSUES IN TERMS OF HOW THE EARRLIESTTT RADIO BROADCAST WAVES WERE REGULATED =WE END UP TALKING ABOUT TELEPHONES AND THAT GETS US TO THE QUETSION OF NET NEUTRALITY =ALL OF THESE ISSUES INFORM ONE ANOTHER BUT THEYRE BOUNCING AROUND THE SAME BASIC ISSUES OF LAW AND REGUALTION, INDIVIDUAL SPEECH, FREEDOM OF SPEECH, CORPORATE CONTROL, AND CORPORATE SPEECCH

PRESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION SUBSECTION TOPIC: PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE*

•*PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE* 1. *WHAT WE THINK OF PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES ARE ACTUALLY QUITE NEW!!!* a. * THERES A HISTORY FOR IT* =WE'VE GOT LARGE DEBATES BETWEEN CANDIDATES -IE: THE LINCOLN DOUGLAS DEBATE WAS DONE THRU 7 DEBATES WHICH TOOK PLACE THRU VARIOUS PLACES DEALING WITH THE ISSUE OF SLAVERY b. *MOST DEBATES UP UNTIL THE 1960 ELECTIONS WAS A CONGRESSIONAL!! DEBATE* =THATS WHERE DEBATES HAPPENED c. *BUT THEN RIGHT AROUND THE EARLY 1900S/LATE 1800S, THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT RISE IN THE COMMITTEE SYSTEM* -IE: U WATCH THE NEWS AND "OH THE COMITTEE CHAIR , THE BILL COULDNT BE DISCUSSED BY THE ENTIRE CONGRESS d. *RISE IN COMMITTEESS SPPIKKEEES DURIN THIS TIME* e. *THE CONGRESS WHICH HAD BEEN THE FLOOR FOR DEBATES ON BILLS AS THE ESTABLISHED NORM, BUT W THE RISE OF THE COMITTEE SYSTEM, U SEE A DECLINE IN HOW MUCH STUFF IS BEING DEBATED ON THE CONGRESSIONAL FLOOR* =AKA DEBATES USED TO BE ON THE CONGRESSIONAL FLOOR AND KNOW THERES A RISE W DEBATES BEING IN THE COMMITTEE (SYSTEM?)* f. *SO EVEN BY THE TIME YOU GET TO SOMEBODY LIKE PRESIDENT WILSON, WILSON SAYS "OH THIS IS A BIG PROBLEM, WE'RE NNNOTTTT DOING ENOUGH PUBLIC DEBATE ON THESE ISSUES* g. *SO WE DONTTTT SEE A PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE UNTILLL 1960!!!!!!* =WE SEE THE FIRST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE IN 1960!!!! 2. *WE SEE THE FIRST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE IN 1960!!!! AND THENNN IT GOESSSS AWWWAAYY!!!!* =PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES HAPPENS EVERY 4 YEARS AND THERE WASNT ANY MORE FOLLOWING THE 1960 ONE a. *PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES CAMEEE BACKKKKKKK IN 1976!!!!!* b. *THERE WAS A WATERSHED!! MOMENT WHERE WE DIDNT TAKE UP AGAIN UNTIL 1972* -watershed: an event or period marking a turning point in a course of action or state of affairs. 3. *THE THING TO UNDERSTAND NOW IS UNTIL 1987, PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES PUT ON BY THE COMMISSION FOR PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES IS NNNOTTTTT A GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION, BUT RATHER, ITS A NONPROFIT!!!! ORGANIZATION!!!! BUT IT IS COSPONSORED!!!!! BY REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS!!!* a. *AKA TO SIMPLY DEFINE IT^^^^^, THE COMMISSION!!!!! ON PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES IS SPONSORED!!!!!! BY DEMOCRATIC!!! AND REPUBLICAN!!!! PARTIES!!* b. *IF YOU LOOK AT THE BOARD OF PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES, YOULL RECOGNIZE A LOT OF NAMES!!!* =BC ITLL BE EITHER FORMER PRESIDENTS!!! OR THEYLL BE FORMER PARTY CHAIRS!! c. *ONE GOOD BOOK ABOUT THIS SUGGESTS THAT COMMISSION!!! ON PRESIDENTIAL!! DEBATES RUINNNEEDDDDDDD DEBATE!!* d. *BC THE COMMISSION BASICALLY SAID....* =THERE SHOULD BE A STRUCTURAL VERSION OF PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES =WE CAN ALLOW CERTAIN THINGS AND NOT ALLOW OTHER THINGS BC WE'RE PAYING FOR IT e. *THOSE THINGS ARE VERY EASILY PERSAUDED/CONTROLLED BY REPUBLICAN/DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES* =SO GETTING A THIRD PARTY INTO THESE DEBATES WERE REALLY CHALLENGING 4. *BUT THIS DOESNT HAPPEN RIGHT AWAY. BAAAACK BEFOREEEE THE COMMISSION ON PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES, THE DEBATES FROM 1976, 1980, 1984 DEBATES WERE ALLLL RUN BY THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS* a. *RECALL ITS A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION* b. *THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS RAN THE DEBATE* =THEY SELECTED THE MODERATORS (TYPICALLY THEY PULLED JOURNALISTS WHO HAD HIGH POLITICAL LEVELS OF KNOWLEDGE c. *BUT THEY HAD MODERATORS COME IN TO ASK QUESTIONS!!! TO THE CANDIDATES AND THE CAMERA WAS THERE* d. *IT WAS SOMEWHAT UNSTRUCTURED!! BUUUUT THERE WAS ALLOTTTT OF GRILLLINGGG OF THE CANDIDATES BY THE MODERATORS* =AKA JOURNALISTS e. *OVERTIME, BOTH REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES ARE LIKE "WE DONT REALLY LIKE THIS"* =AND SO THIS LEADSSS UPPP TO THE REAL PUSH!!!! OVER WHO GETS TO BE A MODERATOR f. *BACK IN 1984, THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS WAS TRYING TO RUN THE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES AND THERE WASSS SOOOO MUCH DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN! BOTH THE DEMOCRATIC/REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES AANDDDD THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS ABOUTTT HOWWWWW TO ORGANIZE THE DEBATE* =SO FINALLY, THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS START SCALING DOWN THEIR ROLE =SPECIFICALLY BARBARA WALTERS COMES OUT AND BASICALLY SAYS "THESE TWO DUMMIES ARE ACTING LIKE KIDS" g. *AKA BARBARA WALTERS MAKES AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT SAYING "THESE TWO DUMMIES ARE ACTING LIKE KIDS" AKA SAYS HOW DIFFICULT ITS BEEN TO GET THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES TO AGREE TO SOME BASIC DEBATES* =SO THIS IS THE FIRST STATEMENT ABOUT THIS ISSUE SAID DURIN THE 84' DEBATE h. *AS THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS IS TRYING TO GET ORGANIZED FOR THE 88' DEBATE, THE COMMISSION STARTS DEVELOPNG!!! AND FINALLY, THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS PULLSSS OUTTTTTT ALL TOGETHER* =AT ISSUE WAS, HOW MANY DEMANDS THE DIFFERENT CANDIDATES WERE PLACING ON WHAT THE DEABTE SHOULD LOOK LIKE i. *THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OFFICIALLY SAID "THEYRE WITHDRAWING SPONSORSHIP OF THE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES... BC THE DEMANDS OF THE TWO CAMPAIGN ORGANIZATIONS WOULD PERPETRATE A FRAUD ON THE AMERICAN VOTER. IT HAS BECOME CLEAR TO US THAT THE CANDIDATES' ORGANIZATIONS AIM TO ADDD DEBATES TO THEIR LIST OF CAMPAIGN TRAIL CHARADES DEVOID OF SUBSTANCE, SPONTANEITY AND ANSWERS TO TOUGH QUETIONS. THE LEAGUE HAS NOOO INTENTION OF BECOMING AN ACCESSORY TO THE HOODWINKING OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC"* =AKA THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN SAID EFFFF!!! ALLA YALL! WE DONE! LMAO SO THEY LEFT j. *THE COMISSION EVENTUALLY TAKES OVER BOTH PARTIES* =WHAT IS AT ISSUE IS MEMORAN OF UNDERSTADNING =AND IT GOES INTTOOO DEPTH OF HOW LONG ANSWERS CAN BE AND HOW MUCH THE MODERATOR CAN DO 5. *SOME OF THIS HAS CHANGED IN THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS. BUT FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE TIME THE COMMISSION OF PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES WAS ORGANIZING (AND STILL DOES), THE MAJORRRRR CRITQQUEEESSSS!!!!!!! OF THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS....* a. *MAJOR CRITQUE #1: THERE WAS MINIMAL!!!! CLASH!!! AND FEWER FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS!!!* =THE CANDIDATES WERE ACTUALLY ENCOURAGEDDDDDDDD TO AVOID CLASH! =THERE HAS NEVERRR BEEN! CROSS EXAMINATION BYYY THE CANDIDATES =THERE HAD BEEN EARLY ON ATTEMPTS TO SAY "U CAN CROSS EXAMINE ONE ANOTHER" AND THE CANDDIATES SAID "NO THANKS WE'LL PASS ON THAT" lol b. **MAJOR CRITQUE #2: BRRIEFFFF RESPONSSESS!!!* =REPONSE TIME HAS TICKED STEADILY DOWN ANDIS DOWN TO LIKE 2MINS c. *MAJOR CRITQUE #3: THERE ARE MOREEEEE TOPICSSS!!! DISCUSSEDDD IN LESSSSSSSSSSS DEPTH!!!* =THISSS IS ONEEEE OF THE BIGGGGGG ISSUES HERE =THE IDEA IS EVEN IF UR IT OVER THREE DEBATES, U CANT HAVE CLASH IF U ONLY SPEND 10 MINS ON TOPICS =ITS JUST SOUND BITING d. **MAJOR CRITQUE #4: HUGEEE REDUCCEDDDD MODERATOR ROLE!!* =BARBARA WALTER COMPLAINS THE MODERATOR CANT DO MUCH e. **MAJOR CRITQUE #5: INCCREASEE!! IN SOUNDDD BITE RESPONSES!!!* =EVEN NOW IF WE TALK, IF U DO A SEARCH FOR PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE MOMENTS, THERES THESE QUICK RESPONSES!* 6. *AFTER SEEING THOSE CRITIQUES, NOW SOME OF IT HASSSSS CHANGED!!!* =AKA SPECIFICALLY DURING THE PAST 2 DEBATE CYCLES a. *BUT THOSE ARE SOME OF THE COMMON THINGS AHVE HAPPENED* b *BUUUUT THEYRE NOTTTT BY ACCIDENT* 7. *IN TERMS OF ANSWER!!! TIMES.!!!...* a. *THE RESULTS ARE...* -*IN 1976:* 3.5 MINUTES -*IN 1980:* 4 MINUTES -*IN 1984:* 4.5 MINUTES -*IN 1988:* 3 MINUTES -*IN 1992:* 1.67 MINUTES -*IN 1996:* 1.5 MINUTES -*IN 2000:* 2 MINUTES -*IN 2004:* 2 MINUTES ANSWERS W 90 SECOND REBUTTAL -*IN 2008:* 2 MINUTE ASNWERS 5 MINUTES OF DISUCSSION -*IN 2016:* 3.5 MINUTES ANSWER. 2 MIN REBUTTAL. b. *THEYRE DOIN MOREEEEE NOW TO OPEN IT UP TO DISCUSSION AFTERWARDS!!* =MAYBE TO INCREASE ROLE OF MODERATOR* c. *BUUUUT OVERALL, RESPONSEEEE TIMEEEE HAS GONE DOWNNNN* =W # OF TOPICS GOING UP 8. *THIS LEADS TO A DIFFERENT WAY IN WHICH THE DEBATES ARE ACTING!!* a. *MAYBE THEYRE NO LONGER ABOUTTT POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE* (NOT SIGNIFICANTLY) b. *NOBODY WATCHES THEM FROM BEGINNING TO END. WHAT ENDS UP GETTIN PICKED UP IS THE SOUNDBITING MOMENTS!! THAT ARE ABLE TO EXIST!!!* =SOME OF THEM HAVE A DIF EFFECT =CERTAINLY THEY CAN CHANGEEEE THE DISCUSSION/CONVERSATIONAL NETOWRK ABOUT CANDIDATES* =IF NOT ON POLICY TOPICS THEN ON HOW WE UNDERTAND/RELATE TO THEM -IE: BACK IN 1986, PRES. REAGAN IS RUNNING FOR REELECTION! AT THE TIME, HE WOULDVE BEEN THE OLDEST !! PRESIDENT. AND SO THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF QUETIOSN ABOUT HIS WELLBEING. HE KNEW THIS QUESTION WAS COMING. HE MAKES A JOKE AND IT BECOMES A SOUNDBITE OF THE DEBATES AKA A BIG THING THAT IS NOTCEABLE/ HAPPENED DURING IT =SOMETIMES ITS NOTTTT ABOUT THEIR ABILITY TO DISCUSS POLICIES, SOMETIMES ITS THESE HIGHPOINTS/GOTCHA MOMENTS -IE: ANOTHER ONE FROM 1988 DEBATE, ITS ANOTHER AGE QUETION ABOUT DAM QUAL RUNNING FOR VP AND HOW YOUNG HE WAS. HE HAD A PRETTY COMMON ANSWER. HE ALSO KNEW HE WAS GONNA BE ASKED IT. HE GOT ROASTED! BY HIS OPPNENT c. *ANOTHER YET DIFFERENT EXAMPLE* =IN BOTH OF THOSE PREVIOUS EXAMPLES THEY TRIED TO CUT OUT THE AUDEINCE REACTION TO IT =YET W THIS EXAMPLE THEY HAD A TOWNHALL DEBATE!! WHERE THEY UNIQUELY INCLUDED THE AUDEINCE -IE: IN 1992, THEERE WAS THE EMERGENCE OF THE TOWNHALL. IN THE TOWNHALL FORMAT, THE MODERATOR IS PLAYING A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT ROLE!!! AND IN SOEM CASES, THE MODERTOR MAY BE WEAK OR STRONG -IE: ANOTHER ONE FROM 2012 DEBATE W ROMNEY!! VS OBAMA. ROMNEY ASSERTED SOMETHING ABOUT OBAMA AND THEN IT TURNS OUT HE WAS FACTUALLY WRONG AND THE MODERATOR POINTED OUT TO THAT =THE MODERATOR WORKS TO KEEP POEPLE ON TOPIC AND GET THEM TO ASNWER QUESTIONS THEY HAVENT YET

PRESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION SUBSECTION TOPIC: PRESIDENTIAL STYLE AND FRAMING -moderator: moderates the presidential debate by asking questions and making sure they stay on topic and answer questions if they havent

•*PRESIDENTIAL STYLE AND FRAMING BACKGROUND!!* 1. *THE RHETORICAL PRESIDENCY SUGGESTS THAT PRESIDENTS HAVE THE ABILTY TO SPEAK DIRECTLY!! TO THE AMERICNA PPL* a. *IN DOING SO, THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO MOVE THRU POLITICAL AGENDA BY SHIFTING THRU POPULAR UNDRESTANDING ON A SUNJECT* b. *THEREFORE,, THIS GETS TO THE ISSUE OF STYLE/FRAMING* =PRESIDENTS HAVE THE ABILITY TO SHAPE THEIR LEGACY THRU VERY SPECIFIC WORD CHOICES 2. *ONE OF THE TRENDS IN PRESIDENTIAL COMMINICATION RESEARCH IS RHETOTICAL ANALYSIS (AKA ANALYZING MAJOR SPEECHES)* a. *ROB HEART, COMBINES RHETORICAL ANALYSIS WITH SOME CONTENT ANALYSIS* b. *HE HAS A COMPUTER SYS THAT ANALYZES PPL'S TONE, STYLE, ETC* 3. *NOW ROB HEART WOULD SUGGEST THAT PRESIDENTIAL LANGUAGE VARIES BY...* -OPTIMISM -ACTIVITY aka how much movement -REALISM aka how realistic the policy is -COMMONALITY aka how much we're drawing on our shared identity -CERTAINTY aka RESOLUTE/TOTALITY language a. *IN REFERENCE TO THE RESOLUTE/TOTALITY LANGAUGE, HEART SUGGESTS THAT THATS GONE DOWN IN DOMMEESSSTICCC SPEECHES!!! ALTHOUGH IT STILL STAYS VERY STRONG IN FOREEIGNNN SPEECHES* =BC THE AMERICAN PUBLIC ISNT LOOKING AT IT AS MUCH b. *THATS OF COURSE BEFOREEE THE ELECTION OF TRUMP* =THEREFORE, THERES BEEN A LOT OF ANALYSIS ON TRUMPS PRESIDENTIAL RHETORIC 4. *IN THIS SECTION, WE'LL TALK ABOUT 2!!!! OF TRUMP'S PRESIDENTIAL RHETORICS* =BECAUSEE THEY USE THE DICTION PROGRAM =HIS ADMINISTRAION WAS USING BOTH CONTENT AND RHETORICAL ANALYSIS =ALSO GIVES U A FLAVOR OF ANALYZING PRESIDENTIAL RHETORIC ------------------------------------------------ •*PRESIDENTIAL STYLING AND FRAMING (SPECIFICALLY TRUMP'S)* =AKA SOME STUFF ON STYLE IN REGARDS TO TRUMP 1. *ACCORDING TO THE STUDY, "EXPLORING CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP: A COMPARATIVE ANALSYS OF THE RHETORIC OF CLINTON AND TRUMP IN THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION....* a. *ONE THING IT SUGGESTS: TRUMP!!! WAS SIGNIFICANTLY MOREEE LIKELY!!! TO USE "HYPERBOLIC!!!! CRISIS RHETORIC REGARDING THE INTOLERABLE NATURE OF THE STATUS QUO"* -hyperbole: EXAGGERATED statements or claims NOT meant to be taken literally. = TRUMP IMPLIED THAT STATUS QUO HAS TO BE CHANGED WE GOTTA FIGHT AGAINST IT b. *NOTICE THAT TRUMP IS USING A LOT OF VERRRY HYPERBOLIC CRISIS RHETORIC* -hyperbole: EXAGGERATED statements or claims NOT meant to be taken literally. =TRUMP WAS SAYING IF WE DONTTTT CHANGE THE STATUS QUO, WE'LLL BEEE IN DEVASSTATION!!!!* c. *THEY ARGUED THAT THIS ALLOWED TRUMP TO EMPHASIS W HIS AUDIENCE A....* -SHARED SOCIAL IDENTITY -A PURSUIT OF A COMMON GOAL d. *IT ALLOWED HIM TO SORT OF ENCOURAGE THE FORMATION OF A COLLECTIVE MEMORIAN OF NATIONAL NOSTALGIA* =HENCEEE, "MAKEEE AMERICA GREAT AGGGAINN!!" e. *HE PAINTS THE BEFORE PICTURE OF WHY AMERICA IS BAD SO HE CAN MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN* 2. *ACCORDING TO ANOTHER STUDY, "PERFORMING POPULISM: TRUMP'S TRANSGRESSIVE DEBATE STYLE AND THE SYNAMICS OF TWITTER RESPONSE"....* a. *MATT LIKES THIS ONE BC WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE* b. *WHAT THIS STUDY WAS LOOKING AT: THEY WERE ANALYZING!!!!! THE DEBATES!!!!* c. *WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR: TRYING TO SEE IF TRUMP'S DEBATE STYLE WAS GONNA PREDICTT!!!! CERTAIN RESPONSES ON TWITTER!!!* d. *RESULTS: SUPPORTED THE VIEW THAT TRUMPS NORM VIOLATING TRANSGRESSIVE STYLE (WHICH IS A TYPE OF PERFORMANCE) RESONATEDDDD WITH VIEWERS!!! SIGNIFCANTTTTLYYYY MORE THAN CLINTON'S CONTROLLED!! APPROACH* =THIS RESULTED IN TRUMPGETTING LOTSSS OF DISCUSSION ON TWITTER e. *^^^^^THAT CAN BE TRACED BACK TO HIS STYLE!!!! OF PERFORMACE IN THOSE DEBATES* ------------------------------------------------ •*PRESIDENTS SPEAK WITHIN CERTAIN GENRES* 1. *THE OTHER THING WE OFTEN WILL LOOK AT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PRESIDENTIAL RHETORIC IS THE VARIOUS!! GENRES THAT PRESIDENTS SPEAK WITHIN* a. *THESE GENRES ESSTABLIISHHHH!! CERTAIN EXPECTATIONS!!!! BUT THEY CAN BE ALTERED OVER TIME BY PRESIDENTS* b. *THERE ARE TONS OF GENRES THAT ADHERE!!! AROUND THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY* 2. *CONSIDER THE WORK OF JAMIESON & CAMPBELL, "DEEDS DONE IN WORDS".....* a. *THEIR WORK LOOKS AT THE VARIOUS!!! GENRES OF PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS* b. *THESE GENRES INCLUDE........* -THE PRESIDENT BEING THE MOUNER IN CHIEF -WAR RHETORIC!! ---------------------------------------------- 3. *GENRE #1: *THE PRESIDENT BEING THE MOURNER IN CHIEF!* =THESE CAN BE MOMENTS OF CRISIS =GENRES HAVE CERTAIN EXPECTATIONS DEPENDING ON WHAT THEY ARE =THEY ALLOWWW THE PRESIDENT TO FRAMEEEE ISSUES!!!!!//////UNDERSTANDING!!!! TO UNDERSTAND THE EVENT -IE: PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON'S SPEECH FOLLOWING THE OKLAHOMA BOMBING!!!! HE DELIVERS A SPEECH THAT IS VERY MUCH A EULOGY BUT IS TRYING TO FRAME!! THE EVENT!!!! AS TO HOW AMERICANS MUST REACT TO IT -IE: GEORGE BUSH'S SPEECHES FOLLOWING 9/11 ATTACK. THESE ARE MOMENTS OF CRISIS SPEECHES THAT ALLOW PRESIDENTS TO FRAMEE THE ISSUE/UDNERSTANDING TO FIND THE EVENT 4. *GENRES OVERALL....* a. *ALLOWWW THE PRESIDENT TO FRAMEEEE ISSUES!!!!!//////UNDERSTANDING!!!! TO UNDERSTAND THE EVENT* b. *ALLOWS THEM TO DEFINEEE EVENTS//ESTABLISH POLICIES!!!//PRIORITIES* c. *ALLOWS PRESIDENTS TO SAY, "HERES SOME THINGS THE COUNTRY SHOULD BE ABOUT, OR THESE ARE THE WAYS IN WHICH WEEE SHOULD UNDERSTAND THESE ISSUES"* =INAUGURAL ADDRESSES DO THIS AS WELL AS THE STATE OF UNION ADDRESS -IE: CONSIDER THE INAUGURAL ADDRESS!! WHERE THEY TAKE THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY!!!!! AND DELIVER A SPEECH AND ITS LIKE THE STATE OF UNION ADDRESS AND ITS SORT OF A MIXTURE OF DELIBERATE IN THE SENSE THAT MOST OF THESE SPEECHES COMBIEN POLICY GOALS AS WELLA S DISCUSSION OF NATIONAL VALUES. ITS AN IMPORTANT BLEND THAT ALLOWS PRESIDENTS TO SAY "HERES SOME THINGS THE COUNTRY SHOULD BE ABOUT, OR THESE ARE THE WAYS IN WHICH WEEE SHOULD UNDERSTAND THESE ISSUES* 5. *ALSO CONSIDER THE STATE OF UNION ADDRESS* a. *WHATS INTERESTING IS UNLIKE THE INAUGURAL SPEECH, THE STATE OF UNION (AKA ANNUAL MESSAGE TO CONGRESS) IS THE ONLYYYYY COMMUNICATION THAT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY REQUIRED OF THE PRESIDENT!!!!* b. *YOU CAN GO BACKK TO ARTICLE 2, SECTION 3 OF THE US CONSTITUTION WHICH SAYS....* "THE PRESIDENT "SHALL FROM TIME TO TIME GIVE THE CONGRESS INFO OF THE STATE OF THE UNION, AND RECOMMEND TO THEIR CONSIDERATION THE MEASURES AS HE SHALL JUDGE NECESSARY AND EXPEDIENT!!!"* ="FROM TIME TO TIME" AKA WHEN U FEEL LIKE IT lol 6. *SO, WHEN WE THINK BACK TO THE SHIFT TO A RHETORICAL PRESIDENCY, INITIALLY ,THE ADDRESS CONGRESS/STATE OF UNION WAS A REPORT THAT WAS READDD!!* =a. *EFFERSON THOUGHT THIS FELT A LITTLE TOO KINGLY//TOO MUCH LIKE WHAT A REGAL AUTHROITY MIGHT DO* =SO IT MOVED TO A WRITTEN REPORT ONLY =ONCE AGAIN, WILSON BROUGHT IT BACK! AS AN ACTUAL SPEECH =THE STATE OF UNION LIKE THE INAUGURAL SPEECH BLENDS THESE DELIBERATE GOALS!! b. *SIDE NOTE: THIS IS SOMETHING THAT ONLY MATTERED ONCE EVERY 4 OR 8 YEARS* =SO U MIGHT SEE IT IN THE NEWS 7. *THE FIRST ANNUAL ADDRESS THAT THE PRESIDENT GIVES IS TYPICALLY NOTTT CALLED THEIR STATE OF UNION* a. *THE WHOLE IDEA IS THEY NEED TO BE IN OFFICE FOR A YEAR!! BC THEYRE REPORTING ON WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THAT YEAR* b. *SO WE CALL THE FIRST ONE AN ADDRESS TO CONGRESS!!! OR ANNUAL COMMUNICATION* =BC IF THEY WERE JUST ELECTED, THEY CANT GIVE IT BC NOT ENOUGH EXPERIENCE c. *AFTER THEIR FIRST YEAR, THEN WE START CALLING IT A STATE OF UNION* d. *SO A PRESIDENT THAT HAS 4 YEARS HAS 3 STATE OF THE UNION ADRESSSES AND 1 ADDRESS TO CONGRESS* ---------------------------------------------- 8. *GENRE #2: WAR RHETORIC* a. *CONSIDER THE "DAY OF INFAMY SPEECH"* b. *REFERS TO FDR DECLARING WAR!!!!!! AKA THE AMERICA'S FORMAL INVOLVEMENT IN WORLD WAR II* =AKA PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT NAMED THE DAY PEARL HARBOR HAPPENED AS A DAY OF INFAMY BC ITS A DAY THAT WILL BE REMEMERED IN HISTORY FOREVER 9. *HOW PRESIDENTS TALK ABOUT WAR IS A DEFINING!! FEATURE OF THE AMERICAN PRESIDENCY!!!* a. *KEEP IN MIND, SINCE AMERICA'S FINDING, THE US HAS ONLY BEEN AT PEACE (DEPENDING ON HOW YOU COUNT IT) MAYBE 17 OR 20 YEARS OF ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE* b. *ALMOST ALL PRESIDENTS HAVE HAD TO ENGAGE IN SOME TYPE OF WAR RHETORIC* =AKA EXPLAINING A WAY OF WAR OR WHY WE'RE GOING TO WAR 10. *WE DONT ONLY USE WAR RHETORIC WHEN WE'RE GOING TO WAR... PRESIDENTS CONTINUE TO USE THAT LANGUAGE!!//VOCAB!! TO TALK ABOUT OTHER POLICIES//INITIATIVES* a. *CONSIDER PRESIDENT JOHNSON MAKIN HIS FIRST ADDRESS TO CONGRESS..* =JOHNSON WAS PRESDENT AFTER ASSASSINATION OF JFK =JOHNSON TALKS ABOUT A WAR ON POVERTY =U CAN ALSO FIND NIXON TALKING ABOUT A WAR ON DRUGS! b. *THE LANGAUGE OF THE PRESIDENCY ON THE WAR HAS CERTAIN GENRE CONSIDERATIONS* =THERES CERTAIN THINGS WE EXPECT WHEN PRESIDENTS DEPLOY THAT LANGUAGE ------------------------------------------------- 11. *GENRE #3: VISUAL RHETORIC* a. *WE USE THIS QUITE A BIT BUT WE'RE NOT JUST CONCERNED IN PRESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION ANALYSIS WITH JUST THE SPEECHES...* b. *AS WE MOVE MORE AND MORE INTO A TELEVISION AGE, WE THINK ABOUT THE TELEVISION EVENT!!!* =PRESIDENTS ARE REALLY AWARE OF THIS/HOW THEYRE SEEN/HOW THEYRE DEPICTED =*THIS IS A PART OF VISUAL RHETORIC 12. *MODERN PRESIDENTS ARENT ONLY INTERESTED IN COMMUNICATION WITH THEIR WORDS, BUT ALSOOOOOO THRU IMAGES!!!!* a. *CONSDIER THE IMAGE OF RONALD REAGAN'S SPEECH! IN 1987* =SAYING MR. GOBBASDJCHOCK OPENED THIS GATE AND TEARED DOWN THAT WALL b. *BUUUUUT BEING ABLE TO HAVE THE ACTUAL GATE IN HIS BACKGROUND DURING HIS SPEECH IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT* 13. *YETTTTTT, HAVING A CERTAIN BACKGROUND/CREATING AN IMAGE WITH YOUR SPEECH DDDOOESSNNNNNTTTT ALWAYS WORK* a. *CONSIDER BUSH'S SPEECH WHERE HE ANNOUNCED THE END OF MAJOR COMBAT OPERATIONS IN IRAQ* =IN THE SPEECH HE SAYS, IN THE BATTLE OF IRAQ, THE US AND ITS ALLIES HAVE PREVAILED! =DONE! b. *YET THE CROWD LATER CAME TO REGRET THE IMAGE OF "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" BANNER IN HIS BACKGROUND* =U CAN ARGUE THE BANNER WAS FOR A SPECIFIC REASON BUT THE US DIDNT EXIT IRAQ IN 2003... =THE IMAGE LIVED IN WELL BEYOND ITS CONTEXT* c. *^^^SO THIS IS THE ISSUE OF HOW THE PRESIDENT IS TRYING TO FRAME CERTAIN EVENTS* ------------------------------------------------- OVERALL IF WE SEE THE RHETORICAL PRESIDENCY AS THE PRESIDENT SPEAKIN DIRECTLY TO THE AMERICAN PPL, WHAT THEY SAY BECOMES IMPORTANT AND HOW THEY SAY IT BECOMES IMPORTANT =SO THAT MERITS ATTENTION TO THE LANGUAGE THAT THEYRE USING, THE GENRES THAT THEYRE OCCUPYING, AND HOW THEYRE USING IT TO DEFINE/FRAME IDEAS!/EVENTS/AND POLICIES IS A BIG ROLE OF THE MODERN PRESIDENT

PUBLIC OPINION AND POLLING SUBSECTION TOPIC: PUBLIC OPINION AND SOCIAL NETWORKS

•*PUBLIC OPINION AND SOCIAL NETWORKS* 1. *SOCIAL NETWORKS INFLUENCE!!! OUR POLITICAL KNOWLEDGES!!!! AND WHAT OUR OPINIONS ARE* 2. *SOCIAL!!! AND CONVERSATIONAL!!!! NETWORKS ALSO AFFECT WHAT WE KNOW!!!! AND THINKKKK!! ABOUT POLITICS!!!* a. *OR SOCIAL/CONVERSATIONAL NETWORKS ARE ATLEAST A FACTOR* b. *SO THE ORIGINAL MODEL THAT TRIED TO GET AT THIS WAS WHAT WE CALL THE 2-STEP!! FLOWW OF COMMUNICATION MODEL* =IN THAT SENSE, WE HAD OPINION LEADERS WHO INTERACTED MORE WITH HEAVILYYYY W THE MEDIAAA AND BECAME INFORMATION SOURCES!!!! FOR THEIR SOCIAL NETWORK!! c. *SO, IN THE ORIGINAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! MODEL OF THE TWO-STEP FLOW!! OF COMMUNICATION MODEL...* (REFER TO VIDEO @50 SECS) =YOU HAD THE MEDIAAA WHICH IS BROADCASTING AND HITTING THESE OPINION LEADDERSS!!!! =THESE OPINION LEADERS!!! ARE SORT OF DIFFUSSINGGGGG INFORMATION AND SPREADING!!! IT AMONGGG THEIR SOCIALLL NETWORK AND IT REACHES PEOPLE TO ALSO AGREE W THEIR OPINIONS =NOW, THIS IS AN OLDER MODEL BUT IT CERTAINLY CHALLENGES!!! THAT DIRECT EFFECTS MODEL (which suggests that the media has a directt!! effect on each individual who interacts w it) =THIS IS REALLY MORE ABOUT MEDIAAA BEING ONEEEE ASPECTTT OF OUR SOCIAL LIVES!!! =TEHSE EARLY STUDIES WERE RLLY INTERESTED IN WHO THOSE OPINION LEADERS WERE AND WHAT MADE THEM OPINION LEADERS =SO THE BIG THREE QUESTIONS WERE: who one is, what one knows, and whom one knows =^^THOSE WERE THE THINGS THAT INDICATES WHETHER SOMEONE BECOMES AN OPINION LEADER =THE THING THIS MODEL HIGHLIGHTS IS THAT HUMAN DECISION MAKING ISSSSSS SOCIALLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!! =SO WHEN UR LOOKING AT MEDIATED IMPACTS, U ALSO NEEDDD TO LOOK AT COMMUNITY LEVEL INFLUENCE =SO THIS MODEL ACCOUNTS FOR THAT^^^ TYPE OF INTERACTION =HOWWEVERRR, THE MODEL DOESSS DOWNPLAY HOW MUCH THE INDIVIDUAL!!!! INTERACTS W THE MEDIA =MANY WAYS, ITS LESS ABOUT TWO STEP AND MORE ABOUT OPINIONNN DIFFUSION (ITS NOT ALWAYS DIFFUSED FROM OPINION LEADERS EITHER. SOEMTIMES, IT MIGHT BE THE MEDIA!!! SENDING ONE TYPE OF DOMINANT FRAME AND THEN OPINION LEADERS ARE CONNECTING THRUUUU SOCIAL NETWORK!!!! ON ISSUES!!!) -IE; THE IRANIAN MOSS OPINIONS SPREAD THRU SOCIAL MEDIA =CONVERSELY, THERES A LOT OF INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN LARGE OPINION LEADERS AND SMALL OPINION LEADRE MAYBE WIHTOUTT A CENTRALIZED COMMUNITY HUB -IE: MAYBE THIS IS CLOSER TO WHAT WENT ON AT THE ARAB SPRING. OPINION DIFFUSION WAS STRICTLY GOING ON THRU SOCIAL MEDIA WHERE IT BYPASSED STATE CONTROLLED FORMS OF MEDIA!!! =IT^^^ WASNT A TWO STEP FLOW BUT IT WAS ABOUT USING MEDIAA AS A WAY OF CREATING SOMETHING (SHARING OPINION AND OPINION FORMATION) =OTHER RESEARCH SUGGESTS THAT THESE INTERPERSONAL NETWORKS AT TIMES, ARE GONNA BE MORE IDEOLOGICALLY HOMOGENOUS!! IN TERMS OF INFO SHARING! =PERHAPS SOCIAL PEERS GONNA BE MORE HOMOGENOUS THAN EVEN MEDIA OUTLETS -IE: CAMPAIGN MESSAGES MIGHT HAVE A MORE REINFORCING EFFECT!!! WHEN U TALK ABOUT IT W UR FRIENDS d. *REFER TO THE NEW MODEL AT POINT #5 BELOW* 3. *BUT WHEN U THINK ABOUT ONLINE!!! OPINION LEADERSHIP, RECENT STUDIES!!! SUPPORTTTTT!! THE IDEA!!! THAT INFLUENTIALS!! EXERT DISPROPORTIONATE!! AMOUNT OF INFLUENCE ON SOCIAL MEDIA* a. *INFLUENTIALS AKA THE ONLINE OPINION LEADERS* b. *THE STUDY SUPPORTS THE IDEA THAT THESE OPINION LEADERS ARE EXERTING A DISPROPORTIONATE AMONT OF INFLUENCE ON SOCIAL MEDIA!! * =SO MANY MORE SO THAN THOSE WHO FOLLOW THEM c. *TYPICALLY, THESE ARE GONNA BE MORE ACTIVEEE!! ONLINE USERS!!!* =THEYRE GONNA POSSESS HIGHER LEVELS OF ONLINE INVOLVEMENT!!! =GONNA EXPLORE MORE STUFF ONLINE =OTEN WILL HAVE HIGHER LVELS OF SELF=PERCEIVED KNOWLEDGE THAN NON-OPINION LEADERS 4. *THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THESE INFLUENTIAL OPINION LEADERS ARE...* a. *CHARACTERISTIC #1: HIGH COMMUNICATION ACTIVITY* =EARLIER STUDIES HAVE LOOKED AT STUFF LIKE TWITTER =THEYRE AROUNDDD ALOTTTT b. * *CHARACTERISTIC #2: GENERALLY HAVE HIGHHH CREDIBILITY* =ATELAST FOR THEIR AUDIENCE c. * *CHARACTERISTIC #3: NETWORK CENTRALITY* =AKA A LOT OF POEPLE COMING INTO THEM AND THEM SHARIN THAT INFO OUT =SO IN THAT OLD TWO STEP FLOW MODEL, PERSONAL ACQUINTANCE AND DIRECT!1 CONTACT WAS PRETTY CENTRAL "HEY I WATCH THE TV NOW IM GONNA TALK ABOUT THE ISSUES W MY NEIGHBORS DOWN THE STREET" 5. *THE NEWWWWW TWO STEP FLOW OF COMMUNICATION MODEL* (INSTEAD OF THE ORIGINAL, MAYBE IT LOOKS MORE LIKE THIS) a. *SOCIAL MEDIA HASSSS MADE IT POSSIBLE TO BYPASS COMMUNITY LEADERS W TARGETTED MESSAGES!!!* b. *SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS HAVE ENOUGH DATA ON THEIR USERS THAT INSTEAD OF GOING DIRECTLY TO OPINION LEADRES, MAYBE A POLITICLA CAMPAIGN CAN BYPASS!! THAT LEADER ALLTGEOTHER AND SPEAK DIRECTLY TO POTENTIAL FOLLOWERS* -IE: IN THAT PIC OF BERNIE SANDERS SAYING "I AM ONCE AGAIN ASKING FOR YOUR FINANCIAL SUPPORT" LOL bernie on his campaign sent a message directly to indivudals instaed of his message going thru opinion leaders first ^^SOCIAL MEDIA OFFERS WAYS OF BYPASSING OPINION LEADERS -------------------------------- OVERALL, W PUBLIC OPINION , WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT STUCKK IN THE DIRECT EFFECTS MODEL AKA THE ORIGINAL MODEL =PUBLIC OPIN WORKS V MUCH IN TANDEM W OUR OSCIAL NETWORKS AND ITS A COMPLEXXX ISSUES INCLUDIN A NUMBER OF INTERACTING FACTORS

PUBLIC OPINION AND POLLING SUBSECTION TOPIC: PUBLIC OPINION POLLS

•*PUBLIC OPINION POLLS* 1. *PUBLIC OPINION POLLS AND THE NEWS MEDIA ARE REALLY ATTACHED AT THE HIP!* a. *IN THE US, WE CAN LOOK BACK TO THE 1920S AND THERE WAS THIS MAGAZINE THAT HAD A BROADD READERSHIP* =THEY WERE ABLE TO SEND OUT A MAIL SURVEY ABOUT THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION b. *THEY WERE PRETTY ACCURATE* c. *BUUT THEN THEY HAD A BIG FAILING IN 1936, THEY PREDICTED THAT ROOSEVELT!! WAS GONNA LOSE THE ELECTION WHEN INSTEAD HE WON* 2. *GEORGE GALLUP PROMISED HIS FIRST BIG CLIENT (THE WA POST) WHERE HE PROMISED THEM THAT HE COULD OUTPERFORM!!! THE MAGAZINE!* a. *AND THEN HE DIDDD* b. *THAT GIVES RISEEE TO THE MODERN POLLING COMPANY THAT WE CALL THE GALLUP POLL* =ITS ONE OF TOP OPINION POLL FIRMS c. *THERES LOTSSS OF DIFFERENT NEEDS FOR Y SOMEONE WOULD NEED A POLL* =NEWSPAPERS LOVE THE MEDIA AND THE ACCURATE POLLS =POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS RELY ON POLLS FOR ASSESSMENT!! AND STRATEGY! AND USE THEM TO GUAGE HOW THEIR CAMPAIGN MIGHT DEVELOP d. *THE MEDIA LOVES POLLS BUT IT PLAYS INTO A PROBLEM WE HAVE, WHICH IS THAT THE MEDIA LOVES POLLS BUT IT ALLOWS THEM TO COVER MEDIA ELECTIONS IN TERMS OF A HORSE RACE* =IF UR RUNNING POLL AFTER DAY AND DAY, THERES THIS NOTION OF SOMEONES PULLING AHEAD, OHHH ITS CLOSE ^^ITS THIS CONSTANT COVERING OF AN ELECTION AS A HORSE RACE e. *RECALL MEDIA FRAMES THATS KINDA GENERIC LIKE A HORSE RACE* 3. *POLLS AS USED IN THE MEDIA CANNN HAVE SOME LIMITATIONS!!* a. *THE GOV'T USES POLLING DATA SINCE IT NEEDS IT TO JUSTIFY POLICIES IN TERMS OF BROAD PUBIC SUPPORT* 4. *WHEN WE TALK ABOUT POLLS, THERE ARE SOME IMPORTANT TERMINOLGY WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND* =HELPS US UNDERSTAND WHEN AND WHY POLLS ARE GOOD!!! AND PREDICTIVE MAYBE WHEN THEYRE NOT a. *REMEMBER, WE WANNA MAKE GENERALIZATIONS ABOUTTT A POPULATION FROM A SAMPLE* =SO WE'LL LOOK AT SOME OF THE WAYS IN WHICH U CAN SAMPLE =THE WHOLE IDEA OF PUBLIC OPINION POLLS IS UR TRYING TO GENERALIZE OPINIONS HELD BY PPL IN THE US =U CANT INTERVIEW EVERYONE. U HAVEEE TO TAKE A SAMPLE =BBBUUUUUUUUUTTTTTTT U MUSTTT MAKE SURE THAT YOUR SAMPLEEEE IS GENERALIZABLE ABOUT THE WHOLLLEEE POPULATION b. *TERM #1: PROBABILITY SAMPLE* =REFERS TO EEVERY!!! PERSON IN THE POPULATION UNDER STUDY HAS AN EQUAL!!! AND KNOW CHNACE OF BEING SURVEYED =IN THIS, WE WOULD SAY "AH EVERY PERSON THE POPULATION UNDER STUDY (AKA IF WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE A CLAIM ABOUT THE PPL IN THE US OR WE'RE TRYING OT MAKE A CALIM ABOUT PPL IN CALI,) WE WANNA SAY EVERYONEEE IN THE STATE HAD AN EQUAL CHANCE OF BEING SURVEYED!!! =SO RANDOM SAMPLING IS USUALLY ONE OF THE COMMON WAYS IN WHCIH WE CAN GET TO A PROBABILITY SAMPLE c. *TERM #2: NONPROBABILITY SAMPLE* =REFERS TO DELIBERATE FOCUS ON A SPECIFIC GROUP =LETS SAY WE WANNA STUDY DRUG USERS =DOING A RANDOMMM SAMPLE IS PROBBALY GONNA GO TO WASTE BC WE WANNA GO AFTER A SPECIFIC POPULATION' =RANDOM SAMPLES WILL ASKPEOPLE WHO ARENTTT DRUG USERS =AND DRUG USERS MIGHT NOT ALWAYS WANNA BE IDENTIFIABLE =W THAT, U CAN DO SNOWBALL SAMPLES!!! WHERE U TALK TO ONE RESPONDANT AND THEY GIVE U NAMES OF TOHERS!!! U JUST KEEP BUILDING UR SAMPLE FROMTHAT 5. *BUT WHATEVER U DO, THE PURPOSE OF A POLL IS TO DRAW CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THE POPULATION!!!!!! NNNOTTTT ABOUT THE SAMPLE!!!!* =WE WANT A SAMPLE THATS GONNA ALLOW US TO GENERALIZE CONCLUSIONS ABOUTTT THE SAMPLE TO THE POPULATION AS A WHOLE a. *BUUUT IF WE'RE GONNA GENERALIZE, THAT GETS US INTO OTHER QUESTIONS* 6. *ISSUES/QUESTIONS THAT CAN COME FROM GENERALIZING!!!* a. *ISSUE/QUESTION #1: THERE CAN BE SAMPLING!!!!//MARGIN!! OF ERRORS!!* =REFERS TO IT NOTTTT BEING A MISTAKE, ITS JUUUST A RANGGEEE OF POSSIBLE RESULTS =THE SAMPLING ERROR IS ONLLLYYYYY AN ERROR INTRODUCED BYYY USING A SAMPLE INSTEAD OF THE ENTIRE POPULATION =BC PPL CANT SURVEY THE ENTIRE POPULATION, SURVEYING A SAMPLE RAISES THE CHANCE!!!! OF THE POPULATION BEING MISREPRESENTED IN SOME WAY -IE: HEIGHT. WHATS THE AVG HEIGHT OF AN ADULT GERMAN??? THATS TOUGH TO MEASURE. EVEEN IF WE GET A GOOD RANDOM SAMPLE OF 1000 GERMANS, THE RESULTS ARE GONNA BE REALLY CLOSE TO THE NATIONAL AVERGAE BUTTT ISNTTT GONNA BE EXACT. =THE MARGINNN OF ERROR GIVESSSS USS THE POSSIBLE!! RANGE OF HEIGHTS^^^ b. **ISSUE/QUESTION #2: RELATED TO THISIS CONFIDENCE LEVEL* =REFERS TO WHAT WOULD IT LOOK LIKE IF U DIDDD GET THE CHANCE TO INTERVIEW THE ENTIRE POPULATION (RATHER THAN JUST A SAMPLE) -IE: LETS SAY U READ SOMETHING AND U GOT A POLL W A 95% CONFIDENCE LEVEL AND A 3% MARGIN OF ERROR. IF WE INTERVIEWED EVERYONE, THE ANSWERS WOULD FALL+/- 3%, 95% OF THE TIME* =AKA IF WE WERE TO INTERVIEW A SAMPLE OF THE US, WE DO ONEEE RANDOM SAMPLING N WE DRAW FROM THAT, IF WE RAN THAT STUDY OF THE ENTRE POPULATION AND WE DID THAT 100 TIMES, 95%OF THOSE TIMES, OUR ANSWER WOULD BE ACCURATE WITH A RANGE OF IT BEING +/- 3% TO THE RIGHT ASNWER c. **ISSUE/QUESTION #3: WHO DID THE POLL?* =SOMETING TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN READING THRU POLLS =NOT ALL POLLLS ARE CREATED EQUAL -IE: IF U GO TO 5/38, THEY RATE POLLING FIRMS SO U CAN SEE THE GRADE FOR DIFFERENT POLLING FIRMS =IT ISSS WORTH THINKINGBAOUT WHO ACTUALLY RAN THE OLL d.**ISSUE/QUESTION #4: WHO PAID FOR THE POLL???* =MOST OF THE POLLINGS ARE DONE BY COMMERCIAL FIRMS =ONE OF THE HISTORICAL REASONS Y POLLING IS SO HEAVLY DONE IN MEDIA IS THAT IF U WERE ABLET TO GET PRESS COVERAGE OF UR POLLING FIRM FOR PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS, THESE FIRMS CAN MAKE MONEY =MIGHT AFFECT STUFF LIKE QUESTION WORDING WHICH CAN SKEW THE RESULTS e. **ISSUE/QUESTION #5: WHOOO DID THEY TALK TO? AVOID SELF-SELECTION POLLS* =ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS A QUESTION OF SAMPLE!! IF ITS A SURVEY OF BUSINESS PEOPLE, THAT CAN TELL U A LOT ABOUT BUSINESS PPL BUT NOTT ALL AMERICANS =SO THATS Y U WANT A BIG BROAD REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE -IE: AMERICAN IDOL WHERE U CALL IN AND VOTE ITS NOT EVERYBODY U SELF-SELECTED IN. =SELF-SELECTING IS PROBLEMATIC IN GENERALIZING f. **ISSUE/QUESTION #6: WHEN WAS THE POLL DONE???* =IF UR TALKINGABOUT ISSUES W BROAD OPINIONS (SUCH AS WHAT ARE UR VIEWS ON ABORTION?) THOSEE CAN BE INFLUENFCED BY SHORT TERM EVENTS g. **ISSUE/QUESTION #7: WHAT WAS THE QUESTION ORDERING??* =MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE =ALSOOO HOOW MANNNYYY QUESTIONS U ASK =WORDING OF THE Q MAKES A BIG DIF =QUESTION ORDERING CAN SEEEDDD RESPONSES AND DRIVE CERTAIN TYPES OF REACTIONS h. *ISSUE/QUESTION #8: AVOID PUSH POLLS* P=PUSH POLLS ARE ACCUSATIONS!! =AKA RUMORS =PUSHING IS U REALLY WANNA PUSH SOMETHING =POLLING IS THE RHETORICAL FORMAT AND NOTTT THE METHODOLOIGCAL GOAL =THERE ARE CERTAINLY A NUMBER OF NATIONAL ORGANZATIONS AROUND OPINION POLLIN G =THEYRE ALL LIKE "U CANT DO THAT THATS A VIOLATION ----------------------------- OVERALL THOSE ARE JUST SOME THITNGS TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN U COME ACROSS PULIC OPINION POLLS =AND THEY ARE A PERVASIVE FEATURE OF AMERICAN POLTICAL TALK.MEDIA =BUT THEYRE NOT ALWAYS GREAT CA =CAN BE V USEFUL/HELPFU =MIGHT HELP US UNDERSTAND THINGS LIKE THEWILL OFTHE POEPLE BUT UALWAYS NEED TO DIG A LITTLE DEPER

PUBLIC OPINION AND POLLING SUBSECTION TOPIC: PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH

•*PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH* 1. *BEFORE WE GET INTO ISSUES OF PUBLIC OPINION POLLING, ITS GOOD TO TAKE A LARGER PERSPECTIVE AND SAY "HOW DO WE FIGURE OUT WHAT PUBLIC OPINION IS?"* a. *POLLING ISSNTTT THE ONLY WAY* =THERES A LONG HISTORY OF TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHOOO IS THE PUBLIC??? =WHAT DO WE MEAN BY SAYING WHA T IS THE PIBLIC =YOU CAN GO BACK TO PLATO AND ARISTOTLE AND SAY "WHAT IS A GOOD NOTION TO BUILD THE SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT ON??* =CAN ALSO LOOK AT LOCKE AND RUSSO WHO HAD A NOTION OF SOCIAL CONTRACT HWERE WE'RE BINDING THE STATE TO SOME KIND OF NOTION OF THE PUBLIC WILL =IN MORE OF MORE MODERN AMERICAN HISTORY WE CAN GO BACK TO THE EARLY 20TH CENTURY WHERE WE LOOK AT TWO FIGURES OF PUBLIC OPINION AND PUBLIC WILL WHICH HELD SOME FRAMEWORKS TO THE OPINION THAT DOMINATE HOW WE THINK ABOUT PUBLIC OPINION 2. *CONSIDER WALTER LIPMAN!! AND JOHN DEWY!!* a. *LIPMAN!!! SOMEONE WHO WAS MORE PLATONIC!! IN THE SENSE WHERE HE BELIEVED THAT GOV'T SHOULD BE RUN BY EXPERTS* =BELEIVED THERE WERE TOO MANY COMPLEX ISSUES THAT MODERN GOVERNANCE REQUIRES =AND THANT HE AVERAGE CITIZEN CANT BE EXPECTED TO MASTER THEM ALLL b. *ATTEMPTS TO DO SO ARE JUST FLAWED AND RUN BUT EXPERTS* c.*ON THE OTHERHAND, JOHN DEWY!!!! WHO WROTE WORKS IN EDUCTIAON/COM/PHILOSOPHY SUGGESTS THAT EVERDAY!!!! PEOPLE DOOOO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DEVELOP THEIR PUBLIC REASONING!!! THRUUU COM* d. *SO W LIPMAN & DEWY, U HAVE THIS SORT OF NOTION OF DO WE ENGAGE MORE W GOVERNMENT RUN BY EXPERTS ORRR THE GOVERNMENT RUN BY EVERYDAY PEOPLE WHO JUST NEED TO EDUCATE THEMSELVES* 3. *WHY DO WE EVEN WANNA KNOW WHAT THE PUBLICC ISS ORRR WHAT OPINION OF THE PUBLIC IS???* a. *GOV'TS ARE GONNA NEEDDD TO TALK TO THIS TO JUSTIFY CERTAIN POLICIES* b. *NOW THERE ARE SOME DANGERS THAT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PUBLIC OPINION THAT WE TYPICALLY CONSIDER...* -*SPIRAL OF SILENCE:* so the basic theory behind thisis that as individuals, we DONT wanna be isolated from society. we worry that people outside the mainstream opinion are going to be ostracized. IF an individual perceives themselves as sharing the majority view, theyre gonna be more likely to express it openly HOWEVER, if ppl perceives themselves to share an opinion w the minority, theyll remain silent WHAT HAPPENS IS OVERTIME, THE MAJORITY VIEW BEOCMES MORE AND MORE VOCAL AND THE MIORITY VIEW BECOMES FAINTER AND FAITNER =SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PUBLIC OPINION, THERES A CHANCEEE THAT THE SMALLER VOICE REPRESENTING THE MINORITY GROUP FADES MORE AND MORE AWAY c. *THAT RAISES THE ISSUE OF HOOWWWWW WE GUAGE!! THE OPINION OF THE PUBLIC!!!* =POLLS ARE NOTTTT THE ONLY WAY TO DO THIS =THERES LOTSSS OF WAYS TO STUDY A POPULATION -IE: U CAN DO ETHNOGRAPHIES, FOCUS GROUPS, EXPERIMENTS, FIELD EXPERIMENTS 4. *THE MAINNN!! THING TO REMEMBER AS WE START THINKING ABOUT THE MOST COMMON WAYS WE COME ACROSS EXPRESSIONS OF PUBLIC OPINION IS STATISTICAL POLLING!!!* a. *POLLLSSS ARE TRYING TO MAKE GENERALIZABLE CLAIMS ABOUT A POPULATION* =SO THERES A NUMBER OF METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES THAT JUMP UP WHEN WE MAKE GENERALIZABLE CLAIMS ABOUT A POP b. *MATT WANTS TO STRESS OPINION POLLLS ARREENNNTTT THE ONLY WAY U CAN GUAGE THE WILL OF THE PUBLIC* ---------------------------------------------- THIS IS A PRECURSOR B4 WE DIVE INTO THE MORE COMPLICATED ISSUES/METHODOLOGICAL CONCERNS OF PUBLIC OPINION POLLLING

OVERVIEW OF RHETORIC: RHETORIC OVERVIEW

•*REVIEW!!! OF WHAT WE PREVIOUSLY TALKED ABOUT RHETORIC AS A RESEARCH METHODOLOGY* 1. *RHETORIC IS BOTH A RESEARCH APPROACH AND AN AREA OF FOCUS!!* a, *MATT WANTS TO REMIND US WHAT SOME OF THOSE KEY THEMES ARE!! AS A WAY OF PREVIEWING WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE DOING* 2. *REFER TO THIS DEFINITION OF RHETORIC BY PALCZEWSKI: RHETORIC IS THE USE OF SYMBOLIC ACTION BY HUMAN BEINGS TO SHARE IEDAS, ENABLING THEM TO WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT MATTERS OF COMMON CONCERN AND TO CONSTRUCT SOCIAL REALITY* a. *THIS IS A UUSSSEEEFULLLL!!!! DEFINITION BC IT SETS UP THE BREADTH!!!! OF THINGS WE'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT* 3. *THIS IS A VERY BROAD RANGING DEFINITION BUT IT HITS A COUPLE OF KEY!!!! THEMES!!!!! a. *WE'RE GONNA BE TALKING ABOUT....* -SYMBOLIC ACTION -HOW WE CAN THEORIZE!!! ABOUT RHETORIC TO UNDERSTAND HOW SYMBOLIC ACTION IS WORKING -HOW RHETORICAL THEORY CAN HELP US UNDERSTAND HOW RHETORIC ENCOURAGES!!!!! WORKING TOGETHER!!!!! AND MAKING DECISIONS!!!! -HOW RHEOTIC CONSTRUCTS!! SOCIAL REALITY -A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT STEM FROM THIS DEFINITION OF RHETORIC 4. *WHAT RHETORIC IS NOTTTTTT!!!!!!!* a. *RHETORIC IS NOT...* -SIMPLY A WAY OF SPEAKING -ITS NOT SIMPLY LYING 5. *RHETORIC IS A WAYYYYY OF LOOKING AT HOWWW WE USE SYMBOLIC ACTION!! TO CONSTRUCT REALITY!! WITH AN AIMMMM TOWARDS COLLECTIVE ACTION* a. *THERE'S SOME SORT OF OUTPUT* b. *WE'RE DRIVING TOWARDS SOMETHING!!!* ------------------------------------------- 6. *RECALL: THINKING RHETORICALLY!! MEANS BALANCING!!!! THHREEEE THINGS!!!!: THEORY, PRACTICE, AND CRITICISM!!!* =RECALL THE TRIANGLE!! a. *THATS REALLY GONNA BE THE THEMES FOR THE WEEK!!* b. *OTHER THEMES THIS WEEK INCLUDE..* -RHETORICAL TRADITION -RHETORICAL THEORY/PRACTICE/CRITICISM!!! 7. *IN MANY WAYS, ITS KINDA HARDDD TO PULL THESE TOO FAR APART* a. *BC THE STUFF WE TALK ABOUT IN RHETORICAL THEORY IS GONNA INFLUENCE RHETORICAL PRACTICE, WHICH ALSO DIRECTLY INFLUENCES RHETORICAL CRITICISM* =THESE VERYYY MUCH INTERACT W ONE ANOTHER b. *IIMMMMMMPORRTANTTT!!!!: FOR EXAMPLE, DONTTT THINK ABOUT THE THEORY OF CAIROS!! THAT WE TALK ABOUT DURING RHETORICAL CRITICISM ONLYYY APPLIES TO RHETORICAL CRITICISM!!* =IT ALSO APPLIES TO RHETORICAL THEORY AND PRACTICE! =THESE RHINGS R VERY MUCH INTERACTING W ONE ANOTHER 8. *AGAIN, AS WE'RE LOOKING AT RHETORIC, WE'RE NOTTTTT JUST TALKING ABOUT SPEECHES!!* a. *WE'LLL START IN THE RHETORICAL TRADTION BY LOOOKING AT HOW RHEOTIC MERGGESSS AS A WAY OF UNDERSTANDING EFFECTIVE ORAL DISCOURSE!!* =BUT THATS JUST SOMEOF THE EARLIEST WORK ON IT b. *RHETORIC IMPLIES ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF ACTS OF SYMBOLIC ACTION!! SUCH AS...* -POLITICAL PROTEST -OVERT PROPAGANDA -COMIC BOOKS!! -LITERATURE -MOVIES -MATERIAL ARTIFACTS: such as monuments c. *THERES A WIDEEE RANGE OF THINGS THAT CONSTITUTE RHETORIC BC THEYRE SYMBOLS!!!* =THEYRE SYMBOLIC SYMBOLS THAT ATTEMPTS TO COORDINATE SOCIAL ACTION ---------------------------- SO HERE IS JUST A REMINDER AS WE WALK INTO RHETORIC AS FROM HERE, WE'LLL START OFF BY LOOKING AT THE RHETORICAL TRADITION THEN THINKING BAOULT HOW WE THEORIZE IT AND HOW IT IMPLICATES PRACTICE AND HOW IT RELATES TO RHETORICAL CRITICISM BUT RHETORIC IS A BROAD FIELD ITS EARLY!! AND ANCIENT we see early traces of it millenia ago BUT ITS STILL V ACTIVE!! AS A WAY OF THINKING, ACTING, AND THEORIZING ABOUT SYMBOLIC ACTION AND HOW IT CREATES SOCIAL REALITY

POLITICAL MEDIA SUBSECTION TOPIC: AGENDA BUILDING

•*AGENDA BUILDING BACKGROUND* 1. *NOT NECESSARILY A HARD DISTINCTION BETWEEN AGENDA SETTING AND AGENDA BUILDING AND AGENDA FRAMING* a. *INSTEAD, MIGHT THINK OF THESE AS ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE* b. *AGENDA BUILDING/SETTING IS MOREE ABOUT WHATTT IS COVERED!!!* c. *AGENDA FRAMING IS MORE ABOUT HOOWWWWWWW ITS COVERED! 2. *REFERS TO DECISIONS!!! MADE THE MEDIA TO DECIDE WHATTT TO COVER!!* a. *AKA WHEN WE TALK ABOUT POLITICAL COM, WE LOOK AT WHAT POLITICAL OBJECTS THE MEDIA DECIDES TO COVER* 3. *DIFFERENT FROM AGENDA SETTING!!!! WHICH IS MORE ABOUT WHAT THE MEDIA COVERS become PUBLICLY SALIENT/IMPORTANT* -salient: how much one thing stands out from the others 4. *WE'LL BE FOCUSING ON SOME OF THE FACTORS!!! THAT GO INTO BUILDING A MEDIA AGENDA!!!* a. *KEEP IN MIND MEDIA AGENDA IS DIFFERENT!!!!!!!!! AGENDA FROM A POLICY AGENDA!!* b. *MEDIA AGENDA REFERS TO WHAT ARE RANK ORDER OF IMPORTANT THINGS FOR THE MEDIAAAA IN COVERING THINGS FOR REALITY!! AND POLTICAL OBJECTS/EVENTS* 5. *WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT 3!!! ASPECTS!!! OF MEDIA BUILDING!!!!* -MACRO!! LEVEL FACTORS -MEDIUM!! LEVEL FACTORS -INDIVIDUAL LEVEL FACTORS --------------------------------------------- •*ASPECT #1 OF MEDIA AGENDA BUILDING: MACRO!!!!!! LEVEL FACTORS* 1. *MACRO LEVEL FACTORS REFER TO ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, CULTURAL, AND IDEOLOGICAL FACTORS!!!* a. *AKA PRACTICES!!!!!!! THAT ARE IN PLACE AT THE BROADEST LEVEL (economic/social/cultural levels) THAT ARE GOING TO AFFECT WHATT MEDIA COMPANIES/ORGANIZATIONS ARE GOING TO IDENTIFY AS SALIENT ISSUES* =SALIENT ISSUES AKA WHAT THEY THINK THEY WANNA COVER -salient: how much one thing stands out from the others -IE: SOMEONE COMING TO THIS FROM A CRITICAL TRADITION WOULD PROBABLY SAY "THE MEDIA TENDS TO COVER ISSUES THAT ARE MORE IMPORTANT TO ELITE!! THAT SENSE THE MEDIA HAS A HEGEMONIC FUNCTION!!! THERE ARE SOME IDEOLOGICAL FUNCTION!! TEHRE ARE SOME IDEOLOGICAL ISSUES THAT ARE REFLECTED IN MEDIA COVERAGE THAT REINFORCE THAT HEGEMONIC OUTLOOK!! -hegemonic: ruling or dominant in a political or social context. b. *A TEXT THAT GETS INTO SOME OF THAT: HERBERT GAN'S "DECIDING WHAT'S NEWS: A STUDY OF CBS EVENING NEWS AND NBC NIGHTLY NEWS'* =ONE THING THAT COMES OUT OF THIS BOOK IS THAT IT SUGGESTS TWO!!!! OF THE MOST PREDOMINANT ENDURING NEEWWWSSSSSS VALUESSS!!!!!! AREEEEE........ (aka 2 important news values are) -*SOCIAL ORDER!!!:* AND -*NATIONAL LEADERSHIP:* c. *THE NEWS FOCUSES!!!! ON WHAT ELITES!!!!! THINK!!!* -IE: CAN BE ECONOMIC ELITES!! OR POLICY ELITES!!! =WHEN THEY COVER STUFF, THEY FOCUS IN ON A SMALL GROUP OF ANALYSTS//COMMENTATORS ON THE NEWS d. *^^ITLL OFTEN BE A CLASH BETWEEN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ESTABLISHMENT INSIDERS!!!* e. *ONE THING GAN'S BOOK ARGUES: THE NEWS!!! SUPPORTS!!!!!! SOCIAL ORDER OF PUBLIC BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL UPPER LEVEL, MIDDLE-CLASS, MIDDLE-AGED, AND WHITE!!!!! MALE!!!!!!! SECTORS OF SOCIETY!!!!!!* =SO IT SUGGESTS THAT THERE ARE IDEOLOGICAL/PROFESSIONAL FACTORS!!! THAT LIMITTTTT!! WHAT THE MEDIA ACTUALLY IDENTIFIES AS IMPORTANT f. *GOOD EXAMPLE: MOST OF THE COVERAGE OF THE ECONOMY IS BBBBYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!!! AAAANDDDDDD AAAABBBOOUUTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY!!!* =SO COVERAGE FOCUSES PRIMARILY ON INTERESTS!!! OF INVESTORS!!!!!!!!!!! =MATT ISNT EVEN TALKING ABOUT CNBC OR CHANNELS AND MEDIA OUTLETS SPECIFICALLY DEVOTED TO TRACKING STOCKS =ABOUT 50%!!! OF AMERICAN FAMILIES OWN STOCKS (THATS DIRECT AND INDIRECT) (indirect is like 401k while direct is actually buying stocks) : =OVER 80% OF THE WEALTHIEST STOCKS ARE OWNED BY THE TOP 10% RICHEST AMERICANS g. *SO BASICALLY WE HAVE COVERAGE VERY MUCH CONCERNED WITH THE CONCERNS FOR INVESTORS AND ONLY 50% OF AMERICANS ACTUALLY OWN ANY STOCK AND REALLY THE PPL WHO ARE GONNA BE THE MOST INTERESTED IN STOCK NEWS IS THE VERY WEALTHIEST!!!!* -IE: IN A VIDEO CLIP AT THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT SOME ECONOMIC SOLUTIONS. background; u got this historian pushing back on "HEY THE COVERAGE/DISCUSSION AROUND THE ECONOMY IS REALLY A DISCUSSION THAT FAAVORSSSS EXISITNG ESTABLISHMENT ELIITES ! the video dealt w it in a larger sense despite not dealing with media coverage. its pointing out maybe a clash between MACRO LEVEL CONCERNS that affect how the media agenda is built. =ITS NOTTTT A DELIBERATE AGENDA where theyre making an evil plan of "what are we gonna do this week? >:) =ITS A SERIES OF MORE ORGANIZATIONAL FACTORS, IDEOLOGICAL FACTORS THAT SEED THE GROUND --------------------------------------------- •*ASPECT #2 OF MEDIA AGENDA BUILDING: MID!!!!!! LEVEL FACTORS* 1. *REFERS TO ORGANIZATIONAL!!!!! ROUTINES OR PROFESSIONAL NORMS!!* a. *AKA IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE GENERATION OF NEWS, WE'RE LOOKING AT NEWS ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE PROFIT STRUCTURED.* =THESE ARE MAINLY CONCERNED WITH TRANSFORMING VERY COMPLEX EVENTS INTOOO APPEALING STORY FOR NEWS CONSUMERS -IE: JOURNALISTS ARE WORKERS LIKE OTHERS! they need to come up w routines for their daily work and GONNA NEED TO RELY ON SOME KEY VALUES EXAMPLES OF THOSE KEY JOURNALIST VALUES INCLUDE TAUGHT IN JOURNALIST SCHOOLS INCLUDE: prominence, conflict, drama, proximities, timely. b. *ORGANIZATIONS!!! HAVE VALUES!!! BUILT INTO THEM THAT ARE GONNA HELP THOSE ORGANIZATIONS IDENTIFY!!!! WHAT TO FOCUS ON AND WHAT NOTTTTT TO FOCUS ON* -IE: WITH JOURNALISTS, news outlets can only talk about so many things. =HELPS THEM FIGURE OUT WHAT MERITS THE ATTENTION?? -IE: DOUG UNDERWOOD (A FACULTY MEMBER AT UW AND IS A JOURNALIST) WHO WROTE A BOOK CALLED "WHEN MBAS RULE THE NEWS ROOM". HES TALKING THERE ABOUT HOW JOURNALISTS PRIORITIZE CERTAIN STORIES OVER OTHERS DEPENDING ON PROFIT. theres gonna be a clash of someone who went through a masters in business program vs journalist program. SOME OF THE RESEARCH HAS INDICATED THAT JOUNRALISTS HAVE A TENDENCY!!! TO RELY HEAVILY!!!! ON ROUTINE CHANNEL SOURCES!!! AND INFORMATION SUBSIDIES!!!! which means journalismis hard and itll be easier if ur getting info DIRECTLY froma gov't or indiustry official to shape what shows up in the news c. *CONSIDER THIS STUDY* back in the 70s where half of the stories on the ny times and the washington post from like 1949-1969 WAS BASED ON PRESS RELEASES/CONFERENCES/INFORMATION SUBSIDIES -WHATS HAPPENING HERE: THE JOURNALIST IS REPORTING ON SOMETHING THAT (IF ITS A PRESS CONFERENCE) THAT THEYRE BEING TOLD!!!! TO REPORT ON!!! ITS NNNOTTTTTT INVESTIGATIVE/SOMETHING THEY WENT TO GO DISCOVER OUT ON THEIR OWN. ITS AN INFORMATION SUBSIDY. THEYRE BEING PROVIDED THAT -subsidy: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive. d. *ANOTHER STUDY SHOWS A STRONGGG!!! RELATIONSHIP!!!! BETWEEN THE LOCAL NEWS COVERAGE ANDTHE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA* =SO THIS ISNTTT JUST A NATIONAL ISSUE e. *TO ADD TO THIS, THERES ALSO AN AUTHORITY!!! BIAS!!!* =LEADS JOURNALISTS TO FOLLOW THE OFFICAL VIEWS EXPRESSEED BY SITTING AUTHORITIES f. *WHEN U THINK ABOUT AGENDA SETTING, YOU THINK ABOUT HOW ARE PPL ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS ARE ABLE TO GENERATE THIS NEWS???* =THE FACT IS, THERES ROUTINE!! AND PPL ARE ASSIGNED TO DIFFERENT THINGS =THIS SHAPESSS WHAT GETS COVERED --------------------------------------------- •*ASPECT #3 OF MEDIA AGENDA BUILDING: INDIVIDUAL!!!!!! LEVEL FACTORS* 1. *REFERS TO SOCIOECONOMIC, POLITICAL, AND PSYCHOLOGICAL ORIENTATIONS OF SPECIFIC JOURNALISTS!!!* a. *SO AUTOMATICALLY, THE QUESTION IS, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT BIAS JOURNALISTS DECIDING WHAT TO COVER OR NOT!!* =THE ANSWER IS KINDA NOT REALLY b. *KEEP IN MIND THERES BEEN A HEAVY EMPHASIS TALKING ABOUT THE LIBERAL MEDIA!!!!! IN THE PAST 30 YEARS* =REMEMBER, PRIOR TO THAT, THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA WAS VERY CONSERATIVE! c. *SO ITS NOTTTTT SOMETHING THAT SHOWS AS A CONSISTENT THREAD THROUGHOUT TIME* d. *CONSIDER THIS STUDY: THERE IS NO LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS IN WHICH NEWS STORIES POLITICAL JOURNALISTS CHOOSE TO COVER* -*WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING AT:* SURVEYED JOURNALISTS AND LOOKED AT THE TYPES OF STORIES THEY CHOSE TO COVER -*WHAT THEY FOUND:* JOURNALISTS THAT THEY SURVEYED DOOOOO TENNDDD TO BE MORE LIBERAL THAN THE GENERAL POPULATION!!! -*WHAT THE ARTICLE ARGUED:* THEYERE NOTTTTTT MORE LIBERAL IN THE MATERIAL THEY CHOOSE TO COVER -*WHY MIGHT THAT BE:* THERE MIGHT BE 100 REASONS BUT THEY SUGGEST IT MIGHT BE JOURNALIST TRAINING!!!! ORRR CONSTRAINING ORGANIZATIONAL FACTORS SOOO IF U HAVE A VERY LIBERAL JOURNALSTS TRYING TO COVER A STORY but theyre in a more conservative news room or if tht news room is owned by someone else TEHRE MIGHT BE ORGANIZATIONAL FACTORS e. *CONSIDER THE BOOK: EVALUATING MEDIA BIAS BY ADAM SCHIFFER* -*SCHIFFER NOTES:* THE LEFT!!! (LIBERAL) LEANING MEDIA ISNTTTTTT REALLY AN ISSUE. THERES NOTTTTTT A BUNCH OF EVIDENCE FOR A NARROW PERSONAL BIAS =BUUUUT HE POINTS TO A LARGER BIAS OF OVERRRRELYING ON ESTABLISHMENT SOURCES!! -IE: ONE THING HE LOOKS AT WAS HOW OBAMACARE WAS DEBATED IN 2009. BASICALLY, WHEN U LOOK AT THE COVERAGE, U SEE A LOT OF INTERVIEWS W GOV'T OFFICIALS//A LOT OF STUFF W RANDOM PEOPLE ON THE STREET!! who wouldnt have specialized knowledge. BUUUUTTT THERE WASNNTTTT A LOT OF REPORTING OF OTHER IMPORTANT STAKE HOLDERS INNN HEALTHCARE REFORM (such as doctors, nurses, insurance company executives) =SO HE SUGGESTS U DONT REALLY FIND SUPERRR LIBERAL BIAS IN TERMS OFFF HOWWW INDIVIDUAL REPORTERS ARE COVERING INDIVIDUAL STORIES --------------------------------------------- OVERALL, WHEN YOU STEP BACK ITS ALL BAOUT HOWWW THE NEWS MEDIA COMES ABOUT PICKING WHAT STORIES TO TALKABOUT!!!! AND THE MEDIA CANTTT COVER EVEYRTHING THAT HPAPENS IN A DAY CHOICESSSS MUSTT BE MADE AGENDA BUILDING ASSSS AN INTELLECTUAL TRADITION IS TRYNA SORTTT THRU SOME OF THE FACTORS THAT ARE GONNA SHAPE THAT DECISION

AGENDA FRAMING

•*AGENDA FRAMING BACKGROUND* 1. *NOT NECESSARILY A HARD DISTINCTION BETWEEN AGENDA SETTING AND AGENDA BUILDING AND AGENDA FRAMING* a. *INSTEAD, MIGHT THINK OF THESE AS ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE* b. *AGENDA BUILDING/SETTING IS MOREE ABOUT WHATTT IS COVERED!!!* c. *AGENDA FRAMING IS MORE ABOUT HOOWWWWWWW ITS COVERED! =HOW AN EVENT IS FRAMED AND HOW IT EFFECTS HOW PEOPLE SEE THE ISSUE d. *SOME SCHOLARS DONT SEE MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AGENDA SETTING/FRAMING* =MIGHT CALL FRAMING SIMPLY SECOND ORDER AGENDA SETTING =BUUUUT MATT WANTS TO TALK BAOUT IT AS SOMETHING DISTINCT ------------------------------------------------ •*AGENDA FRAMING* 1. *ENTMAN'SS!!!!!! (1993) DEFINITION OF AGENDA FRAMING: "TO FRAME IS TO SELECT SOME ASPECTS OF A PERCEIVED REALITY AND MAKE THEM MORE SALIENT IN A COMMUNICATING TEXT, IN SUCH A WAY AS TO PROMOTE A PARTICULAR PROBLEM DEFINITION, CAUSAL INTERPRETATION, MORAL EVALUATION, AND/OR TREATMENT RECOMMENDATION FOR THE ITEM DESCRIBED!!!!* -salient: how much one thing stands out from the others a. *DEFINITION PROVIDES AN ATTITUDE TOWARDS IT SUGGESTING HOWWW U MIGHT ENGAGE THAT SUBJECT* 2. *USEFUL TO THINK OF FRAMING AS A METAPHOR!!* a. *SUCH AS THINKING OF "FRAMING A PICTURE!!!" WHERE YOU FRAME IT IN WAY WHERE YOU ASSSKKKK!!!! PEOPLE TO LOOK AT IT A CERTAIN WAY* -IE: PUTTING A BEAITUFL PAINTING IN BEAUTFIUL ELABORATE FRAME!! VS IE: PUTTING A PHOTOGRAPH IN A SIMPLE!! FRAME b. *THE FRAME YOU CHOOSE TO PUT THE IMAGE IN IMPLIES!!!! WHAT IS PROMINENT ABOUT THE PHOTO* =U CANT LOOK AT EVERYTHING IN IT SO UR TOLD WHAT TO LOOK AT c. *CONSIDER THE EXAMPLE WHERE YOU LOOK AT AUTOMOBILES. SPECIFICALLY AUTOMOBILE DEATHS IN A PUBLIC HEALTH FRAME!* =U TREAT CAR CRASHES LIKE CIGARETTE DEATHS. =UR GONNA END UP COMING WITH VERYYY DIFFERENT POLICIES IN OPPOSITION IF YOU WERE TO LOOK AUTOMOBILE DEATHS IN TERMS OF COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS. for that, driving deaths are unfortunate but theyre inevitable d. *COMPETING FRAMES ARE GONNA HIGHLIGHT CERTAIN VALUES OVER OTHERS* e. *WHY IS THIS? = PERCEPTION IS REFERENCE DEPENDENT"* =THE WORK ON FRAMING IS VERY MULTIDISCIPLINARY (so communication doesnt own the concept alone) =BUUUUT EVERYONEE IN THE FIELDS ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT IT -IE: FROM PSYCHOLOGY, WHEN MIGHT SAY WHY ARE FRAMES WORKING THE WAY THEY ARE. WELL THEY COULD SAY PERCEPTION!! IS REFERENCE!!! DEPENDENT. SO ITS GONNA BE INTERPRETED DIFFERENTLY DEPENDING ON WHAT INTERPRETIVE SCHEMA ARE BEING APPLIED d. *A FRAME IS GONNA FOCUS ON CERTAIN VALUES OVER OTHERS* f. *CONSIDER THE 2 VIDEO CLIPS THAT SHOW TWO DIFFERENT FRAMES!! IN THE VALUES ARE REALLY KINDA WHATS AT STAKE HERE* -*FIRST CLIP:* w cr douglas with the mayor of seattle where you hear in this a bike messenger downtown being asked about helmet laws. the FRAME he deploys is very much a individual rights frame. "its my head i should be able to do what i want with it". IN OPPOSITION, the mayor deploys a contrasting frame and thats public health aka everyone should wear a helmet. you have here competing frames ^^IN THIS VIDEO: they prioritize different values. THE FIRST ONE IS "my head my rights rules". THE SECOND ONE IS the mayors whos response is much longer but his response basiclaly says if u look at this from the frame of pubilc health, then its shared responsibility. so then, helmet laws make a lot more sense. he said that if he does get hurt then he may end up at haborview for months where its taxpayers dollars who have to pay for his recovery etc. a lot more poeple get invovled -*SECOND CLIP:* involves a national election. this clip is of JFK's election in 1960. the kennedy nixon election. this was when kennedy was running for preseident and he was the first irish-catholic to make it to this level of poltical stage. there was signigicant discussion about whether or not a roman catholic was going to be a good president or not. some argued that if hes roman catholic hes going to take more directives from the vatican than the will of the american people. so thats a frame thats in place for understanding kennedy's candidacy. kennedy goes to houstin texas and theres this southern protestant organization and he goes down there and delivers a long speech. the video shows the end of his speech dealing w the issue of whether or not a catolic can be a president ^^^IN THIS VIDEO: he basically says "if the frame is that ur worried im not gonnabe a good president, ok ur gonna vote against me thats fine. BUT THEN HE SORT OF ERECTS THE COMPETING FRAME basically saying, to vote against someone bc of their religious background is UNAMERICAN its unpatriotic. this was said during the cold war so "if we dont hold up these values that we say we do then all of america is the loser and people who look to america for guidance is losing out. SO ITS A PRETTY STRONG ATTEMPT TO ESTABLISH A DIFFRENT FRAME SAYING "LOOK, RELIGIOUS AFFILILATION SHOULDNTT MATTER" THATS A PATRIOTIC STATEMENT 3. *SO IN THIS WAY, FRAMES OFTEN WORK ANALOGOUSLY!!!!!! AND METAPHORICALLY!!!!! a. *AND WHAT FRAMES CAN DO IS ALLOW US TO CATEGORIZE NEW INFORMATION!! IN TERMS OF EXISTING ONES* =THISIS WHY WE USE FRAMES b. *WE OFTEN DISTINGUISH BETWEEN LARGER!!! FRAMES!! AND SPECIFIC ISSUE FRAMES!!!* -*LARGER FRAMES:* IN CONSIDERATION TO THE NEWS MEDIA MIGHT BE SOME GENERIC FRAMES THAT SHAPE MEDIA COVERAGE. for example, presidential elections. they can be UNDERSTOOD AS HORSE RACE FRAMES where its a STRATEGIC GAME OF A CLASH OF PERSONALITIES. "oh ones pulling ahead, lets look at the polls. OH another ones pulling ahead, lets look at the polls again.. STRATEGIC GAMES AKA "this choice may have seemed bad for the candidate BUT not if you look at it as a big game of very intricate chess match. theyll often look at it in terms of a personality match too. NOW THESE ARE VERY COMPLEX WAY OF LOOKING AT FRAMES BC SO MANY ISSUES ARE COVERED. ITS A MATTER OF DISTILLING THAT INFORMATION DOWN. strategic framing in political campaigns are attempts to influence the media frames for covering a candidateSO CERTAINTLY AT THE LEVEL OF A SPEECH WRITER ur gonna wanna influence that frame of BOTH a particular issue and a candidate. so a lot of time goes into HOWWW they want things to be understoodin the media. the reading from a textbook author was talking about how a tv station was talkin about the iraq war from a patriotic frame. thats not bychance. the pentagon studied the process of embedding reporters and the pentagon decdied to embed reporters in the iraq war. its till often a practice. the result is usually favorable military coverage BUT the stories told from on the ground often kind of reflects a favoriable pro-pentagon perspective as a way of framing hte issue ONCE AGAIN FRAMES ARE DRAWINGGG OUR ATTENTION TO CERTAIN VALUES INSTEAD OF OTEHRS -*ONE EXAMPLE OF SPECIFIC ISSUE FRAMING:* FIRST, in 2003, this protestor was run over and killed by an israeli army bulldozer in the gaza strip. there were TWO PHOTOS that were released. the first photo released features a woman protesting. the second photo features her dead after she was run over. THOSE TWO PHOTOS HAVE DIFFERENT VALUES. the first one displayed her as an angry protester. the second one is of tragedy where she died fighting for her rights. this sort of photographic framing highlights some emotions that might be salient -ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF SPECIFIC ISSUE FRAMING:* FOX NEWS vs FOX NEWS LATINO. fox framed the same story in two different way depending on the audience. for FOX NEWS LATINO, they used the headline "in rare move, uni grants $22k scholarship to undocumented student" ON FOX NEWS IN AMERICA, they ran the same news with the same image but instead headlined it, "MONEY FOR ILLEGALS" lmao SOOO THE IDEA IS FRAMING ISSNTTT JUST WORDS ITS NOT JUST IMAGES. ALL OF THESE THINGS CAN AFFECT THE IMPACT OF A FRAME!! 4. *SO THEN IT RAISES THE QUESTION OF, "DOES FRAMING WORK??"* a .*THE ANSWER IS IT DEPENDSSSS!!!///SORT OF//SOMETIMES* b. *CONSDIER THE STUDY THAT WAS LOOKING IN MORE OF AN EXPERIMENTAL CONDITION OF HOW PEOPLE RESPONDED TO DIFFERENT FRAMES* -*THEY FOUND THAT:* PEOPLE RESPOND MORE POSITIVELY TO POLICIES THAT WERE IN "AID TO THE POOR" =IF "AID TO THE POOR" WAS IN THE POLICY NAME, THEN THEY WERE MORE FAVORABLE TO THAT MUCH MORE THAN IF THE WORD "WELFARE" WAS IN THE TITLE INSTEAD =U GOT A DIFFERENT WAY OF FRAMING THE SAMEBASICACTION c. *SOOO THESE THINGS CANNN WORK BUUUUUUUUUT IT ALL COMES BACK TO MEDIATORS AND MODERATORS* =AKA WHAT WE LEAREND =SO A NUMBER OF STUDIES SHOW VERY FEW PPL CHANGE THEIR VOTES BASED ON POLITICAL ADVERTISING!! IT USUALLY GTETS LOT OF MEDIA ATTENTION BUT THEYRE OUTLIERS d. *SO MAYBE THERES SOME INPACT ON AGENDA SETTING BUT ULTIMATELY, THE MEDIA/[RESSURE GROUPS CAN SHAPE THE MESSGE BUT THEY HAVE V LITTLE CONTROL OV THE ENVIRONMENT THAT THAT MESSAGE OCCUPIES* THISIS EVEN MORE TRUE NOW THAT WE BLEND CONSUMERS/PRODUCERS IN THE ONLINE e. *MAYBE ONE OF THE LARGER IMPACTS IS THE BELEF THAT AGENDA SETTING/FRAMING IS LIKE THIS LEADDSSSS TO THE COMMERCIALIZATION OF POLITICS* =AND HE SAID THAT THIS LEADS TO SELLING POLITICIANS TO HOW YOU WOULD SELL SOAP =THAT LINE OF THINKING SUGGESTS THAT CITIZENS ARE BEING FRAMED AS MORE CONSUMERS TO POLITICS RATHER THAN PARTICIPANTS -----------------------------------

POLITICAL COMMUNICATION SUBSECTION: FAKE NEWS !

POLITICAL COMMUNICATION SUBSECTION: FAKE NEWS SUBSECTION TOPIC: FAKE NEWS

POLITICAL MEDIA SUBSECTION TOPIC: AGENDA SETTING

•*AGENDA SETTING BACKGROUND* 1. *NOT NECESSARILY A HARD DISTINCTION BETWEEN AGENDA SETTING AND AGENDA BUILDING AND AGENDA FRAMING* a. *INSTEAD, MIGHT THINK OF THESE AS ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE* b. *AGENDA BUILDING/SETTING IS MOREE ABOUT WHATTT IS COVERED!!!* c. *AGENDA FRAMING IS MORE ABOUT HOOWWWWWWW ITS COVERED! ------------------------------- •*AGENDA SETTING* 1. *AGENA SETTING!!!! REFERS TO THE WAY IN WHICH CERTAIN ISSUES GET MORE PROMINENCE THAN OTHERS!!!* a .*AKA WHAT ARE THE FACTORS!!!!! THAT WOULD LEADDDD TO SOMETHING GETTIN MORE ATTENTION THAN OTHERS???* b. *AKAAA MOREEEE SALIENCE!!!!* -salience: the quality of being particularly noticeable or important; prominence. 2. *AND SPECFICALLY, MEDIA!!!!!!!! AGENDA SETTTING REFERS TO THE WAY IN WHICH THE MEEDDIAAA!!! GIVES CERTAIN ISSUES MORE PROMINENCE THAN OTHERS!!!* 3.*SO TO COMPARE AND CONTRAST THE TWO...* a. *AGENA SETTING REFERS TO...* =WHAT ARE THE FACCCTORSSSS THAT WOULD LEADD TO SOMETHING GETTING MORE ATTENTION THAN OTHERS* b. *MEDIAAA AGENDA SETTING REFERS TO...* =THE WAYYYSSS IN WHICH THAT ACTUALLY PLAYS OUT =OR WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF ISSUES GETTING MORE PROMINENCE THAN OTHERS =AKA MORE SALIENCE!!! -salience: the quality of being particularly noticeable or important; prominence. 3. *THE PRESS IS REALLTTT UNSUCCESSFUL!! IN TELLING PEOPLE WHAT THEYYYY THINK, BUT IS QUITE SUCCESSFUL AT TELLING THEM WHAATTTT TTTOOOOO THINK ABOUT!!* a. *SO ITS NOTTT SO MUCH THIS DIRECT EFFECTS/HYPODERMIC APPROACH TO THE COVERAGE OF POLITICAL COMMUNICATION* =SO LIKE "IF WE REPORT IT, BAM ITS GONNA GO INTO PEOPLES HEADS" b. *RATHERRR IT IS HOWW MUCH PROMINENCE AN ISSUE IS GIVEN IS WHAT PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO TALK ABOUT* c. *SO THERES THIS RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE MEDIAAA!! AGENdA and THE PUBLICCC!! AGENDA!!!* 4. *SO THIS IS A COMPLICATED ISSUE BECAUSE THE MEDIA VALUES THE NEWS WORTHINESS OF A POLITICAL OBJECT WHICH IMPLIES ITS SALIENCE* -IE: A MASSIVE EARTHQUAKE IS NEWSWORTHY AND ITS REPORTED ON BUTTTT ITS ALSO PUBLICLY IMPORTANT!! ITS NOTTT LIKE THE PUBLIC IS LIKE "I CANT WAIT TO HEAR WHAT WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT TODAY AND I GOTTA GO PICK UP A NEWSPAPER a. *THISIS ANOTHER WAY OF TALKING ABOUT THE GATEKEEPING FUNCTION OF THE MEDIAA!!* =THE GATEKEEPING AKA THE MEDIA PERMITS ONLY CERTAIN STORIES IN TO CIRCULATION b. *GOOD EXAMPLE: THE WATERGATE SCANDAL* -IE: A SINGLE OUTLET THAT STARTS TALKING ABOUT WATERGATE, THEN MORE MEDIA OUTLETS START TALKING ABOUT IT, THEN THE PUBLIC STARTS TALKING ABOUT IT THENNN YOURE HAVING HEARINGS THENN NIXON IS IN HOT WATER -IE: ANOTHER ONE IS CLINTON SEX SCANDAL c. *ISSUES HAPPEN WHEN NEWS CHANNELS STARTTTT TO BRING THINGS INTO LIGHT* d. *WE CAN CALL THIS THE CNN EFFECT* 5. *IN THIS WAY, WE CAN TALK ABOUT SOME OF THIS AGENDA SETTING IN TERMS OF "PACK JOURNALISM"!!!!* a. *AKA LIKE A WOLF!! PACK!!* =ONE WOLF CAN FIND OSMETHING AND THENN ALL OF THE SUDDEN THE REST OF THE WOLVES I NTHE PACK IN RUN OV THERE AS WELL b. *THIS ALLOWS FOR TENDENCY FOR JOURNALISTS TO COVER SOME OF THE SAME STUFF* -IE: IF A LOOCALLLL!!!! JOURNALIST PICKS UP THE NY TIMES AND CAN SEE WHAT STORIES THEYRE WRITING ABOUT AND THINKK "OH ITS THE NY TIMES THIS ISSUE MUST REALLY BE IMPORTANT" SO MAYBE THEY CAN START TALKIN ABOUT IT AS WELL c. *PACK JOURNALISM IMPLIES ONCE THERES A CLEAR!!! PUBLIC INTEREST IN A STORY, OTHER!! JOURNALIST MIGHT COME ALONG AND START COVERING IT AS WELL* d. *^^^THUSSS,, ADDING IT TO FUNCTION!!! AGENDA SETTING HAS* =UR JUST GONNA COME APART THAT STORY IN MORE VARIED MEDIA OUTLETS 6. *PRIMING!!! REFERS TO MEDIA INDUCED CHANGES IN VOTER!!! RELIANCE!!! ON PARTICULAR ISSUES AS CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING PUBLIC OFFICIALS* =SO THE ABOVE KINDA GETS US IN TO THE ISSUE OF PRIMING a. *AKA WHEN IT COMES TIME TO EVALUATE PUBLIC OFFICIALS (ESP DURING ELECTION YEARS), WHAT WILL THE PUBLIC SAY ARE KEY ISSUES THAT THEYRE GOING TO VOTE ON???* b. *ONE OF THE ISSUES!!!! IN MEDIA AGENDA RESEARCH IS HOW MUCH AGENDA SETTING!!!! RELLATTESSSSSS TO PRIMMINGGG!!!* =AKA IS MORE COVERAGE BY THE MEDIA GOING TO MAKE THAT A PRIMING FACTOR?? =IF THE PUBLIC IS EXPOSED MORE TO IT, WILL THEY START TO USE!! THAT AS A WAY OF EVALUATING CANDIDATES -IE: CONSIDER THE #METOO MOVEMENT. IT WASNT STARTED BY THE MEDIA BUT IT WAS CERTAINLY PICKED UP BY THE MEDIA. AND THEN IT BECAME AN IMPORTANT TOPIC FOR EVALUATING CANDIDATES. c. *THIS ^^^^ WILL OFTEN HAPPEN WHERE THERE CAN BE CASES WHERE THERES AN ATTEMPT TO USE AGENDA SETTING AS MORE OF A PRIMING ISSUE* -ie: CONSIDER THE SINCLAR BROADCAST GROUP. IS A COMPANY THAT OWNNSS A BUNCH OF MEDIA OUTLETS (THREE STATIONS AND 100 DIFFERENT MARKETS) WHOS GOTTEN IN TROUBLE!!!!! IN THE PAST! for example, they own seattle's KOMO TV! BACK IN 2004 TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION BETWEN BUSH AND KERRY, SINCLAIR HAD THIS PACKAGE WHERE ITS REPORTED THAT ALL 62 OF SINCLAIR'S TV STATIONS WERE GONNA PREEMPT PRIMETIME TV TO AIR THIS SPECIFIC DOCUMENTARY, "STOLEN HONOR". IT WAS A DOCUMENTARY THAT WAS VERY CRITICAL OF KERRY'S ANTI-WAR ACTIVISM. SO THEY RAN IT, GOT IN TROUBLE FOR IT. PPL GOT ANGRY BC THEY WERE DEVOTING SPECIFIC COVERAGE OVER SOMETHING THATS SO POLITICALLY DEVOTED. PEOPLE WHO WERE OPPOSED!!! SAID THIS WAS AN ATTEMPT TO USE AGENDA SETTING AS A WAY OF PRIMING THIS ISSUE FOR THE ELECTION. said this wasnt the role of journalism 7. *GIVEN EXAMPLE ABOVE, DOES MEDIA AGENDA SETTING//AGENDA SETTING HAVE AN IMPACT???* a. *ANSWER: KIND!!1 OF///SORT OF!!* =IT DOESSSS AT THE BROADEST! LEVEL b. *CONSIDER AN EARLY STUDY IN AGENDA SETTING WHICH FOUND THAT AGENDA SETTING IS A WAYY OF CAPTURING SOMEEE OF THE ISSUES THAT ARE GOING INTO AGENDA SETTING RESEARCH* =DONE BY McCOMBS AND SHAW WHERE THEY FOUND OUT THAT =DIFFERENT GROUPS SUCH AS OTHER AGENDAS, MEDIA AGENDAS, PUBLIC AGENDAS, PUBLIC ACTORS, POLITICAL PRESSURE GROUPS (ANY GROUP THATS NOT THE MEDIA =EACHHH OF THOSE GROUPS TRY TO INFLUENCE THE MEDIA AGENDA!!!!!! 8. *AGENDA SETTING IS EASSYYY TO STUDY BC ITS EASY TO TRACK A RISE!!!! AND FALL!! IN MEDIA ATTENTION TO AN ISSUE AND A RISE AND FALL IN PUBLIC ATTENTION TO AN ISSUE AS MEASURED BY PUBLIC OPINION POLLS* a. *BBUUUUUT IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT YOU DDDONNTTTTTT SEE A REVERSE RELATIONSHIP* =YOU DONT SEE A RISE IN PUBLIC ISSUES THAT THEN BECOME A RISE IN MEDIA ISSUES 9. *OBVIOUSLY WE LIVE IN A DIVERSIFIED MEDIA LANDSCAPE NOW BUT CERTAINLY, PREVIOUS RESEARCH HAS INDICATED THAT AGENDA SETTING DIFFERENCES OCCUR BETWEEENNN MEDIA!!!!!* -IE: NEWSPAPERS VIEW ONE THING AS IMPORTTANT WHILE CABLE VIEWS ANOTHER THING AS IMPORTANT a. *MEDIA AGENDA EFFFFFFEEEECCCTSSSSS!!!!! TENDDD TO BE STRONGERRRRRRR FOR NEWSPAPERS!!!* =REASONS ARE UNCLEAR BUT IT COULDDD BE THAT NEWSPAPERS COVER LONGGER STORIES THAN TV... =MIGHT EVEN BE THAT TV TAKES ITS CUES 10. *SO AGENDA SETTING ALSO HAS A STRONGER IMPACT ON WHAT THEY WOULD CALL UNOBTRUSIVE ISSUES!!* -*OBTRUSIVE ISSUES:* ARE ISSUES WEHRE A PERSON HAS LITTLE DIRECT EXPERIENCE a. *CONSIDER THE EXAMPLE OF THERE BEING AN EARTHQUAKE IN SEATTLE AND ITS COVERED BY THE MEDIA* =THEY SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON IT. = AGENDA SETTING EFFECTS IN TERMS OF HOW IMPORTANT THE ISSUE WOULD BE TREATED WOULD HAVE A GREATTERRR IMPACT ON SOMEONE WHO LIVED OUT IN THE MIDWEST! THAN IN SEATTLE =SO IF THIS STORY RUNS IN INDIANA AND ITS COVERED A LOT "THE GREAT QUAKE OF SEATTLE" THERES TONS OF COVERAGE. =THE MEDIA EFFECTS IS GONNA BE GREATER THAN SOMEONE LIVING OUT IN INDIANA BC ITS AN UNOBTRUSIVE ISSUE. THEY DONT HAVE A LOT FO DIRECT FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE WITH SEATTLE OR EARTHQAAKES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! =IN OPPOSSITTION, THOSE LIVING INN SEATTLE, THERE WOULDDNTTTTTT BE A WHOLE BUNCH OF MEDIA AGENDA EFFECTS bc we have lots of experience w the earthqauek --------------------------------------- OVERALL, AGENDA SETTING DOES HAVE AN IMPACT BUT ITS A COMPLICATED ISSUE LIKE ALL MEDIA EFFECTS ARE* BUUUT ITS WORTHHHH KNOWING ABOUT AND THINKIN ABOUT HOWWW ATTENTION TO SUBJECT RELATES TO MEDIA AGENDA BUIILLDDINGG! AND HOWW WHAT YOURE READING IS NOTTT!!!!! THE REALLITTYYY!!!!!! BUTT IS A DEPICTIIOOON!!!! ON WHAT THE REALITY HAS BEEN FUNNELLED THRU A NUMBER OF ORGANIZATIONAL CONSTRAINTS

THE FIRST AMENDMENT TOPIC SUBSECTION: SEDITION, VIOLENCE, AND NATIONAL SECURITY

•*BACKGROUND SEDITION, VIOLENCE, AND NATIONAL SECURITY* 1. *ABRIDGEMENTS: AKA CIRCUMSTANCES!!!!!!!! WHERE THE GOVERNMENT CANNNNNNNNNNNN RESTRICT SPEECH!!!!!!* a. *WE CALL THESE ABRIDGEMENTS!!!!* b. *THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF CASES THAT HAVE BEEN WORKED THRU BOTH THE STATE!! AND SUPREME COURT!!! THAT PROVIDES SOME TEXTURE TO WHENN WE SAY "ITS OK FOR THE GOVT TO RESTRICT THAT TYPE OF SPEECH* =AKA!!! THREEEEEE THINGSSS THAT MAKE IT OK TO RESRICT THAT TYPE OF SPEECH (PUBLIC COMMUNICATION) b. *WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THREEEEE OF THESE:* =AKA!!! THREEEEEE THINGSSS THAT MAKE IT OK TO RESRICT THAT TYPE OF SPEECH (PUBLIC COMMUNICATION) -*FIRST:* SEDITION* -*SECOND:* VIOLENCE (aka speech that incites violence) -*THIRD:* THREATS!! TO NATIONAL SECURITY -------------------------------------- •*ABRIDGEMENT/CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE THE GOVERNMENT CANNNN!!!!!!! RESTRICT SPEECH #1: SEDITION!!!!!* 1. *IN GENERAL, GOVERNMENTS ARE CONCERNEDDDD!! WITH SEDITIOUS COMMUNICATION* -*SEDITIOUS COMMUNICATION:* IS COMMUNICATION AIMMEDD AT VIOLLENNT INSURRECTION/REBELLION 2. *WE ACTUALLY HAVE VERY FEWW SEDITION!!! CONSPIRACY CONVICTIONS!!* a. *THE PROCESS OF SORTING THRU THESE CASES HAS HELPED US IDENTIFY HOW FAR CITIZENS CAN GO IN TERMS OF CRITIQUING THE GOVERNMENT!!! WWWITTHHOUTTT ANY OFFICIAL TROUBLE!!!!!!!!!!!* 3. *WE CALL THESE ABRIDGEMENTS!!!!!!! AKA CIRCUMSTANCES!!!!!!!! WHERE THE GOVERNMENT CANNNNNNNNNNNN RESTRICT SPEECH!!!!!!* 4. *ONE OF THE CASES THAT HELPPPPPPPPPP US FIGURE THAT OUT ISSSS THE: SCHENCK V. US (1919) CASE!!!* a. *CHARLES SCHENCK PUBLISHED!!!! 1500 "LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES" PHAMPHLETS!!!!!* a. *IT WASSS PROTESTTTING THE US'S INVOLVEMENT IN THE!! WORLD WARRR!!!!!* b. *HE CALLED FOR YOUNG MEN TO RESSIIIISSSTTTTT THE DRAFT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* c. *SCHENCK WAS FOUND GUILTY OF VIOLATING THE ESPIONAGE!! ACT!!!* d. *SCHENCK ARRRRGUUUUEDDD!!!!!! THAT THIS WAS A FREEEE SPPECCCH CASE!!!!!!!!!!* =THE FREEE SPEECH CLAUSE OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT DOESSNTTT SHIELD ADVOCACY!! URGING CONDUCT DEEMED UNLAWFUL UNDER THE ESPIONAGE ACT e. *SO SCHENK LOOOSSSSSSTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THE SCHENCH V. US CASEEEEE!!!* f. *BBBBUUUUUUUUT ITS FROMMM THIS CASE THAT THE WE GET THE IDEA OF "CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER"* =SOMETIMES ALSO CALLED HOLMES TEST g. *CONGRESS HAS THE RIGHHTTTTTTTT!!!!!!! TO OUTLAW CERTAIN KINDS OF CONTEXT THAT MIGHT BE HARMFUL TO THE NATION!!!!* =AND WORDS THAT MIIIGHT PUSH PEOPLE TO VIOLATE LAWS PAST CONGRESS -IE: THE HOLMES TEST SAYS YOU CANNTTTTTTTTTTTT YELL "FIRE" IN A CROWDED THEATER ^^^^^THAT TYPE OF SPEECH CREATES A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER thru poeple panicking h. *THERES ARE TIMES IN WHICH WE CAN RESTRICT SPEECH AND SPECIFICALLY WHENNN IT MITIGATES A CLEARRR AND PRESENT DANGER!!* -------------------------------------- •*ABRIDGEMENT/CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE THE GOVERNMENT CANNNN!!!!!!! RESTRICT SPEECH #2: SPEECH THAT INCITES VIOLENCE!!!!* 1. *CONSIDER THE CASE: BRANDENBURG V. OHIO (1969)!!!!!* a .*IMPORTANT CASEEE OF BRANDENBURG WHO IIISSSSSS A MEMBER OF THE KLU KLUX KLAN (KKK)!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LEADERRRRRR IN RURAL OHIO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* b. *BRADENBURG CONTACTS A REPORTER AT A CINCINNATI, OHIO TV STATION!!!! AND SAYS, "WHY DONT U COME COVER OUR KKK RALLY?????? THATS GONNA TAKE PLACE SOON???"* =REPORTER GOES OUT THERE c. *BRADENBERG DELIVERS A SPEECH ADVOCATING BROADDDDDD RAAAACIALLLL VIOLENCE!!!!!!!!!!! ON TV!!!!* d. *EVENTUALLY, OHIO CONVICTTTSSS!!!!!!!!!!! HIM//ARRESTSSSSS BRADENBERG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* -syndicalism: is a radical current in the labor movement that was most active in the early 20th century. Its main idea is the establishment of local worker-based organizations and the advancement of the demands and rights of workers through strikes. =OHIO CONVICTS HIM OF CRIMINAL SYNDICALISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* =OHIO STATES THAT BRADENBERG IS ADVOCATING VIOLENCE AS A PART OF A POLITICAL ORGANIZAITON!!!* e. *THIS CASE GOES ALL THE WAY UP TO THE SUPREME COURT!!* f. *THE SUPREME COURT REEEVVEERRRSESSS!!!!!!! THE CONVICTION!!!!!* =SUPREME COURT SAYS, WELL, YOU CANT BANNN SPEECH WHERE ADVOCACY IS DIRECTEDDDD TO INCITING LAWLESS ACTION UNLESSSSS ITS IMMINENT!!!!* -imminent: about to happen =YOUVE GOTTA REALLLLLYYYYY BE SUGGESTING STUFF THE VIOLENT ACTION IS GONNA HAPPEN IN A TANGIBLE WAY IN A VERRYYY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME -IE: IT HASSSSS TO BE SOMETHING LIKE "IM GONNA PUNCH THAT PERSON RIGHTTT NOWW!!" g. *THIS IS 1969!!!* 2. *THEN A FEWWWW YEARS, ANOTHER CASE, HESS V. INDIANA (1973)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! COMES UP!* a. *THIS SPARKS THE DISCUSSION OF: WELL WHERE IS THE THRESHOLD BETWEEN ADVOCATING GENERALLL VIOLENCE!!!! AND SPECIFIC VIOLENCE????* b. *WHAT HAPPENS IN THE CASE IS THAT GREGORY HESS IS ARRESTED!!!!! AND THERES A STUDENT PROTEST!!! AT INDIANA UNIVERSITY!!! AND THE COPS COME IN AND CLEAR THE PROTESTORS!!! AND GREGORY HESS SAYS, "WE'RE JUST GONNA F**CKIN TAKE THE STREET LATER!!!!!!" =SO THEY ARREST HIM!!! c *HES CONVICTED!!1 AT AN INDIANA STATE COURT FOR DISORDERLY CONDUCT!!!!!!!* d. *IT THENNN GOESSS ALLLLLLL THE WAY TO SUPREME COURT!!!!!!!!!!* e. *ONCCEEEEEEE AGAINNNN, THE SUPREME COURT REVERRSSESSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!! THAT CONVICTION!!!!!* =AKA THEY SAY NVM UR NOT PUNSIHED =THE SUPREME COURT SAYS, "LOOK, WHAT HE SAID AMOUNTED TO NOTHING MORE THAN ADVOCACY OF A LEGAL ACTION AT AN IDEFINITE FUTURE TIME!!!!!!!!" =^^^ THATSSS NOTTTTTTTT SUFFICIENT ENOUGH TO PUNISH HESS'S SPEECH!!!!* f. *THE SUPREME COURT SAYS "THERE WASNNNNNTTTT IMMEDIATE UNLAWFUL ACTION"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* =THE SSSTTTANNNNDDAARDDSSS FOR WHAT CONSTITUTES ILLEGAL SPEECH WHEN IT COMES TO NATIONAL SECURITY/SEDITION/VIOLENT ACTION AREE PRETTTTYYYYYY HHHHHIIIIIGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!! =IT HASSS TO BE VERY TANGIBLE ACTION BASED SPEECH -------------------------------------- •*ABRIDGEMENT/CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE THE GOVERNMENT CANNNN!!!!!!! RESTRICT SPEECH #3: NATIONAL SECURITY!!!!!* 1. *AKA ANOTHER ABRIDGEMENT IS PROHIBITING SPEECH THAT VIOLATES NATIONAL SECURITY!!!!! OR ENDANGERS THE NATION!!* 2. *THE BIG CASE HERE IS THE PENTAGON PAPERS!!!: NEW YORK TIMES V UNITED STATES (1971)* =IT WASNT JUST A LIKE A HANDFUL =IT WAS 7000 PAGES!!!! a. *WHAT THE PENGATON PAPERS WERE:* WERE HIGH LEVEL BRIEFINGS/ANALYSES CONDUCTED BY BOTH THE KENNEDY AND JOHNSON ADMINISTRATIONS ABOUTTTT THE VIETNAM WAR!!! =THESE WERE INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENTS SO THEY WERE BRUTALLY HONEST! b. *THE NSE!! HAD STAMPEDD ALL OF THESE PAPERS AS "TOP SECRET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" c. *BUT ONE OF THE ANALYISTS!!! WHO HAD BROUGHT IN!!! THIS GUY NAMED DANIEL ELLESBURG WHO COPIED AND RELEASEDDDDDD THE TOP SECRET NEWS PAPERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* =HE RELEASED THEM TO THE NY TIMES =SO THE NY TIMES STARTSS PUBLISHING THESE PAPERS =THEY SHOW THE JOHNSON ADMINISTRATION ARE LEADING A MISLEADING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! STATEMENTS TO THE NATION!!!!!!! =ITS PRETTY REVEALING STUFF! d. *THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION THEN MOVESSS TOOO PROHIBIT THE NY TIMES FROM CONTINUING!!!!!!!! TO PUBLISH THE PENTAGON PAPERS!!!!!!!!!!!* e. *AS YOU KNOW, THATS^^^^^6 PRIOR RESTRAINT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* =THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION WAS LIMITING!!!!! SPEECH OF THE NY TIMES BEFORE IT COULD COME OUT f. *SO, THE GOV'T ISSUES A CONJUCTION AND THE CASE GOES TO THE SUPREME COURT!!!* g. *THE SUPREME COURT SIDDESSSSSSS WITH THE NY TIMES!!!!!!!* =THE SUPREME COURT SAID, "THE GOV'T DIDNNTTTTT PROVIDE THE HEAVY BURDEN OF PROOF NEEDED FOR PRIOR RESTRAINT!!!!!!!!!* h. *THEY SAID "YOU KNOW WHAT? THE PENTAGON PAPERS AREEEEEE EMBARRASSING!!!! BUT THEY DONTTTT REALLYYY REVEALLL CRRUCIALLL MILITARY INFORMATION!!!!!"* i. *PRIOR RESTRAINT HAS A RPETTY HIGHHHHH STANDARD THERE* j. *RECALL OUR TALK ABOUT SURVEILLANCE IN THE LAST UNIT:* EDWARD SNOWDEN HAD BEEN CHARGED WITH THE VIOLATION OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT!!! HE REVEALED DETAILS ABOUT THE NSA'S SURVEILLENCE PROGRAM///PRISM PROGRAM!!! he fled the us seeking asylum and hes currently in russia where he still leaves =SO THESE ISSUES DO CONNTINUEEEE TO TO COME UP AND WE LOOK --------------------------------------- OVERALL WHEN WE LOOK AT SEDITION, VIOLENCE, AND NATIONAL SECURITY, THE GOVERNMENT NEEDSSS TO SATISFY A PRETTTY HIGH STANDARD IN ORDER TO ENGAGEEE!!! IN PRIOR RESTRAINT!!!! (AKA RESTRICT SPEECH BEFORE IT HAPPENS!!!!) =EVEN STILL, PUNISHING SPEECH, THE COURTS GENERALLY SAY ITS BETTER TO PUNISH UNPROTECTED SPEECH THAN PROHIBIT POTENTIALLY PROTECTED SPEECH ^^THAT MEANS WE WWANNA ALLOW MOREEEEEE THINGSSSS =IF THEY VIOLATE THE LAW THEN WE'RE GONNA PUNISH THEM RATHER THAN TRYING AS A BLANKET, PROHIBIT CERTIAN TYPES OF SPEECH THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE PROTECTED =WE DONT WANNA VIOLATE SPEECH IN THAT WAY^^ =SORRT OF SIDES W EXPANSION W FREE SPEECH RATHER THAN RESTRICTION OF FREE SPEECH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! =BUT THIS IS STILL GETTING FIGURED OUT. theres was a 2005 case where a conviction of a guy who gave general advnice toa gang on how to instigate violence still very much live issues these are just some of the abirdgements we have to the first amendment (times when we say the gov't CANNN restrct the freedom of citizen/noncitizen public com

THE RHETORICAL TRADITION TOPIC SUBSECTION: ISOCRATES, PLATO, AND ARISTOTLE

•*BACKGROUND!! ON ISOCRATES, PLATO, AND ARISTOTLE* 1. *WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE ANCIENT ATHENIAN TRADITION OF RHETORIC, WE USUALLY TALK ABOUT THE ISOCRATIAN, PLATONIC, AND ARISTITILLIAN STRAINS!!! OF THESE THREE THINKERS!!!* a. *WE'RE GONNA SPEND TIME TALKIN ABOUT THESE THREE THINKERS AND SORT OF HOWWW THEY APPROACH EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION!!!//RHETORIC* b. *WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT ISOCRATES, PLATO, AND ARISTOTLE!! NNNOTTTTTT SOCRATES* =PROBABLY NEVER HEARD OF ISOCRATES BUT HES CONSIDERED (SOMETIMES) A SOPHIST, 2. *ISOCRATES, PLATO, AND ARISTOTLE DEFINE THEMSELVES AGAINNNSTTTT THE SOPHIST!!!!!!!* --------------------------------------- •*ISOCRATES* =(SOMETIMES) CONSIDERED A SOPHIST, ONE OF TEN ATTIC ORATORS, AND RAN A SUCCESSFUL SCHOOL!! 1. *WAS PROBABLY A STUDENT OF GORG-GEOUS!!!* a. *HIS TOMBSTONE HAS A PIC OF GORG-GOUS HOLDING A GLOBE AS IF GORG-GEOUS SHOWED HIM THE WORLD!!*

RHETORICAL CRITICISM TOPIC SUCSECTION: RHETORICAL SITUATIONS

•*BACKGROUND!!! ON RHETORICAL SITUATIONS* 1. *RHETORICAL CRITICISMS!! AND RHETORICAL THEORY!!! AND RHETORICAL PRACTICE ARE ALL CONNECTEDDD AND DONTTTT EASILY GET PULLED APART* =AKA RHETORICAL METHODDD!! UR INVESTIGATING//THEORY UR INVESTIGATING//AND THE OBJECT UR LOOKING AT a. *IN OPPOSITION, MAYBE IN A POST-POSITIVISTIC PRACTICE, IT WILLLLL BE EASILY PULLED APART* =AKA U MIGHT HAVE A VERY CLEAR DISTINCTION BETWEEN ALL THE POSITIVISTIC METHODDDS!! UR INVESTIGATING, THEORIES UR INVESTIGATING//AND THE OBJECTS UR LOOKING AT b. *BUUUUUT WHEN IT COMES TO ALL OF THE RHETORIC MEHTODS/THEORIES/AND OBJECTS, THERE ISSSS NOOOO CLEARR DISTINCTION* KAPEESH?! -IE: STUFF THAT COULDVE GONE INTO RHETORICAL THEORY CANNNOTTTT BE CLEARLY DISTIGUISHED FROM RHETORICAL METHODS c. *NORMALLY THE RHETORICAL METHOD YOURE USING IS THE RHETORICAL THEORY YOURE USING* -IE: we talked about metaphor. METAPHOR IS THE THEORY!! ABOUT HOW LANGUAGE MIGHT OPERATE OR INFLUENCE OUR PERCEPTION OF AN ISSUE BUT ITS ALSO A METHODOLOGY!!! YOU GO THRU AND LOOK THRU SMALL METAPHORS AS THEY LINK TO A LARGER METAPHORIC FRAMING (SO THEORY!! AND METHOD GO HAND IN HAND HERE) 2. *WHEN WE LOOK AT SOME OF THESE OTHER ISSUES IN RHETORICAL CRITICISM, HOW DO THEY IMPACT THE ACT OF DOING CRITICAL WORK??? * a. *ANSWER: ONE OF THE CONCEPTS THAT COULD GO IN RHETORICAL THEORY! OR CRITICISM! ARE RHETORICAL SITUATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* =EVERYTIME U SPEAK, U TRY TO COME UP WITH THE BEST OR MOST APPROPRIATE RESPONSE TO THE RHETORICAL SITUATION YOU FIND URSELF IN -IE: WHEN YOU COME UP WITH A PANOPTO LECTURE VIDEO, YOU TRY TO COME UP WITH A VIDEO THAT HAS JUST THE RIGHT RESPONSE =A GOOD PRESENTATION IS ONE THATS MOST FITTING TO THE RHETORICAL SITUATION --------------------------------------------- •*RHETORICAL SITUATIONS* 1. *IN REFERENCE TO EARLIER WORK IN RHETORICAL CRITICISM, LLOYD BITZER!!!!!!!!!! WRITES ABOUT THE RHETORICAL SITUATION* a. *BITZER WRITES, "SITUATIONS CALL FOR CERTAIN RESPONSES!!!!!!!* =AKA CERTAIN SITUATIONS!!!!! JUST SCREAMMM OUT!!!!! FOR A CERTAIN PARTICULAR RESPONSE!!!!!!!! 2. *WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THESE CERTAIN RHETORICAL SITUATIONS!! THAT CALL OUT FOR A PARTICULAR RESPONSE????* a. *CHARACTERISTIC #1: EXIGENCE!!!!!!!!* -*EXIGENCE: AN IMPERFECTION!!!! MARKED BY URGENCY!!!!!..... SOMETHING WAITTINGG!!! TO BE DONE, A THING WHICH IS OTHER THAN IT SHOULD BE* =IS AN EVENT!!! THAT NEEDS TO BE RESPONDED TO -*BLITZER WOULD ARGUE: IF!!!!! YOU CANTTT AFFECT THE EXIGENCE WITH RHETORIC, THEN ITS PROBABLY NOTTTT A RHETORICAL SITUATION* -IE: AKA IF THERE WAS A HUGE TIDAL WAVE ABOUT TO CRASH DOWN IN FRONT OF YOU, DELIVERING A SPEECH TO IT WONTTT DO ANYTHING =^^^ITS NOTTTT A RHETORICAL SITUATION =YOU CANTTTT INFLUENCE THE TIDAL WAVE THRU THE VIRTUE OF A SPEECH -IE: IN OPPOSITION, IF YOU GIVE A VERYYY PERFECT, PITCH-PERFECT TALK ABOUT FLOOD RELIEF, THEN THEERREEEEE ISSS THE RHETORICAL URGENCY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! EXIGENCE REQUIRES =EXIGENCE REQUIRES THERE TO BE AN IMPERFECTION!!! AND URGENCY!!! (SOMETHING TO BE DONE) AND THEREFORE, SOMETHING WAITING FOR IT TO BE DONE IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE A RHETORICAL SITUATION ANNNDD IT CAN BE AFFECTED BY RHETORIC b. *CHARACTERISTIC #2: RHETORICAL AUDIENCE!!!!* -*RHETORICAL AUDIENCE: THOSE PERSONS WHO ARE CAPABLE OF BEING INFLUENCED BY DISCOURSE!! AND MEDIATORS!!! OF CHANGE* =YOU ALSO NEED A RHETORICAL AUDIENCE =AKA THE AUDIENCE ARE PEOPLE WHO CANNNNN BE INFLUENCED BY THE RHETORICAL DISCOURSE!!!!! AND AREEEE MEDIATORS OF CHANGE -IE: PALSEWSKY, A RESEARCHER, LOOKED AT DIFFERENT CENSUSES OF RHETORICAL AUDIENCES. LIKE IN 2004, THEY ARGUE!!!!! REPUBLICANS SAW THAT THE BASE WOULD BE SUFFICIENT FOR REELECTION. AKA IN THE CAMPAIGN RHETORIC, THEY SAY THE BASE WOULD BE ENOUGH!! TO GET US TO ELECTION!!! THOSE WERE THE MEDIATORS OF CHANGE. MOST OF OUR COMMUNICATION MESSAGES SHOULD BE FOCUSED ON THAT BASE! WE CAN SPEAK TO OTHER AUDIENCE MEMBERS THEY DONT WANNA NOT DO THAT BUT REALLY, SAID THEIR ATTENTION NEEDED TO BE FOCUSED ON THE BASE IN ORDER TO REACH THEIR GOALS OF REELECTION (FOCUSES SPEEECH BY LOOKING AT EXISTING VOTERS AND THEIR CONCERNS!!!!!!) -IE: IN 2008, THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN, SAW THE RHETORICAL AUDIENCE NOTTTTT AS EXISTING VOTERS!!!!!!!, BUT AS ELIGIBLE!!!!! VOTERS!!!! SO THEY WANTED TO INFLUENCE EVERYONE WHO WAS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE AND ALSO START REGISTERING PEOPLE!!!!!! (FOCUSES SPEECH BY LOOKING AT ELIGIBLE VOTERS AND THEIR CONCERNS) =^^^YOUR AUDIENCE CHANGESSSS HOW YOU DESIGN SPEECH/MESSAGES c. *CHARACTERISTIC #3: CONSTRAINTS!!!!* -*CONSTRAINTS: FACTORS THAT HAVE POWER!!!!! TO CONSTRAINT DECISION AND ACTION NEEDED TO MODIFY EXIGENCE!!!* =AKA CONSTRAINTS ARE THE FACCCCTORRSSSS THAT LIMITTT!!!!!! THE SITUATION!!!!!! =FACTORS CONTSTRAIN DECISIONS!!!! AND ACTIONS!!!! NEEDED TO MODIFY HAT EXIGENCE!!!!! =CERRRTAINNN FACTORS HAVE THE POWER TO CONSTRAIN DECISIONS!!!!! =CERTAIN TOPICS CAN BE MORE OR LESS COMPLICATED TO EXPLAIN -IE: SO IF A SCIENTIST IS TALKING ABOUT A VIRAL ILLNESS TO A GENERAL PUBLIC, THE TOPIC ITSELF MIGHTTTTTT BE A CONSTRAINT AND HOWWWW YOU DESCRIBE THAT TOPIC!!! =^^^^SOME RHETORICAL AUDIENCES MAY BE HOSTILEEEEE!!!!!! TO CERTAIN IDEAS so u have to talk about those topics more delicately =^^^MEANWHILE, SOME RHETORICAL AUDIENCES WILL ACCEPT THE IDEA 3. *BITZER!!! ARGUES, THE FITTINGGGGG RESPONSEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! MEETS THE EXPECTATIONS!!!! OF THE RHETORICAL SITUATION!!!!* a. *AKA THE FITTING RESPONSE MEETS THE EXPECTATION* -IE: WHEN SOMEONE NAILS A SUCCESSFUL MOVIE, TV SHOW, (OR WHATEVER THE RHETORIC IS), BLIZTER SAYS MAYBE WE CAN LOOK AT IT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF HOWWW IT WAS A GOOD RESPONSE TO THAT PARTICULAR SITUATION!!! =AKA RESPONSE WAS REALLY FITTING!!!! AND REALLY WORKED!!!! IN AFFECTING THE SITUATION!!!! HOW IT NEEDED OT BE b. *OVERALL, THIS^^^ ASSUMES THESE RHETORICAL SITUATIONS EXIST!!!! AND CALL FORTH CERTAIN RHETORIC!!!!!* =BUUUUT SITUATIONS CAN BE AFFECTED BY RHETORS -------------------------------------- •*SITUATIONS CAN BE AFFECTED BY RHETORS!!!!!!* 1. *THEYRE NOTTT SIMPLY SITUATIONS THAT FLOAT WAITNGGGG FOR A HUMAN TO SHOW UP AND THEY RESPOND* 2. *RHETORS CAN ATTEMPT TO DEFINEEEE THE EXIGENCE!!!!!!* -*EXIGENCE:* AN IMPERFECTION!!!! MARKED BY URGENCY!!!!!..... SOMETHING WAITTINGG!!! TO BE DONE, A THING WHICH IS OTHER THAN IT SHOULD BE* a. *MAYBEEEEE THE AUDIENCE DOESNTTTT SEE THE PROBLEM UNTIL SPEAKER IS THERE TO MAKE IT SEEEMMM LIKE THERES A PROBLEM!!!!!!!!!!** b. *THEY CAN ATTEMPT TO DEFINE THE EXIGENCE ITSELF* -IE: AWARENESSSS RAISING RHETORIC!!!!! WHERE PEOPLE CAN SAY "LOOK, YOU DONT THINK THIS IS A PROBLEM OR AN EXIGENCE!! IM GONNA TRY TO GET TYOU TO THINK THISIS SOMETHING THAT MERITS UR ATTENTION" "THAT IT ISSS AN EXIGENCE THAT REQUIRES OUR RESPONSE" 3. *RHETORS MIGHT INFLUENCE THE CONSTRAINTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* a .*YOU CAN PUSH BACK ON WHAT THE EVALUATIVE CRITERIA ARE!!!! FOR A PARTICULAR PIECE OF RHETORIC!!!* b. *CONSIDER THE EXAMPLE OF THE FREDERICK DOUGLAS SPEECH, "WHAT TO A SLAVE IS THE FOURTH OF JULY????* = THE CONSTRAINTS!!!!! OF THE FOURTH OF JULY SPEECH WAS TYPICALLY "OH IT SHOULD BE A GENERALLY PRAISEWORTHY SPEECH ABOUT THE UNITED STATES!!!! TO PRAISE THE UNITED STATES IN A VERY EFFECTIVE WAY, THAT WAS THE CONSTRAINT. THATS WHAT WAS GONNA DICTATE A FITTING RESPONSE =IT DEFINES WHAT THE CONSTRAINTS SHOULD BE =IT SHOULDNTTTTTTT JUST BE A SPEECH ABOUT PRAISE =IT CAN BE DOING SOMETHING ELSE 4. *A FITTING RESPONSE!!!!!!!!!!! MAY NOTTTTTT ALWAYS BE CONVENTIONALLLLYYY FIT!!!!!!!!!!!* a. *^^^THIS IDEA IS IN DEVELOPMENT!!!!! OF BLITZER'S!!! ORIGINAL APPROACH* b. *AKA A FITTING RESPONSE ISNTTT ALWAYSSS CONSERVATIVE!!!!!* =ITS NOT, "THIS IS THE DEFINITION OF A FITTING RESPONSE AND YOURE REPSONSE NEEDS TO FIT INT HERE* c. *RHETORS HAVE THE ABILITY TO CHANGEEE THE SITUATION THEMSELVES!!!* =ITS A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE RHETORICAL SITUATION AND THE RHETOR!!!! ATTEMPTINGGGG TO DEFINE THAT RHETORICAL SITUATION 5. *REVISITING THE FREDERICK DOUGLAS "WHAT TO A SLAVE IS THE FOURTH OF JULY???" TO FURTHER EXEMPLIFY AN UNCONVENTIONAL FITTING RESPONSE* a. *SPEECH WAS DELIVERED IN 1852!!!!* b. *THE SITUATION IS INTERESTING!!!: THE TYPICAL GENRE OF SPEECHES ON THE 4TH OF JULY IS TYPICALLY PRAISEWORTHY SPEECHES!!!!! DOUGLAS IS ASKED BY THE ROCHESTER LADIES ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY TO COME AND DELIVER A FOURTH OF JULY SPEECH!!! AND DELIVERED AN UNNNCONVENTIONAL!!! SPEECH THAT WASNTTTT PRAISEWORTHY OF AMERICA* =HES SUPPOSED TO COME AND DELIVER THIS SPEECH =THE TYPICAL 4TH OF JULY SPEECH GENRE IS ORALTY AND PRAISING THE VALUES OF THE REVOLUTION!!! =DOUGLAS DELIVERS THIS RICH SPEECH =THROUGHOUT THE SPEECH, ITS UNCONNVENTIONALLLL!!!! AND IS NOTTTTT A PRAISEWORTHY SPEECH!!!!! b. *HE SUGGESTS THAT STATEMENTS ABOUT AMERICAN LIBERTY/CITIZENSHIP/FREEDOM WERE OFFENSIVEEEEEEEEEE TO THE ENSLAVEDDDD WHO LACKSS ALL OF THOSE THINGS* b. *DOUGLAS WASNTTT ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE CAPTIVITY OF THE ENSLAVED PEOPLE, BUUUT THEIR EXPLOITATION!!!!!!* c. *STATED THAT THE 4TH OF JULY ISNTTTT THE SAME TO SLAVES AS THEY ARE TO WHITE PEOPLE* d. *THIS STINGING!!!! CRITIQUE OF THE UNITED STATES BECOMES FAMOUS!!!!* =IT WAS A REBUTE THATS ROOTED IN AMERICAN VALUES ABOUTTTT AMERICAN VALUESSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! e. *OVERALL, HERE, YOUVE GOT SOMETHING THAT ISSSSSSSSSS THE FITTING RESPONSE (EVEN THOUGH IT WASNTTT THE CONVENTIONAL FITTING RESPONSE)* =IT REDEFINES SOME OF THE CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESS IN A WAY THAT WE LOOK AT IT NOW ---------------------------------------- •*THE CONCEPT OF KAIROS!!!!!!!!* (CONCEPT THATS RELATED TO THE FITTING RESPONSE (THAT IT ISNT NORMALLY RELATED TO)) 1. *DEFINITION OF THE CONCEPT OF KAIROS: THE OPPORTUNE MOMENT; THE FITTING RESPONSE* a. *AKA KAIROS IS THIS OPPORTUNE MOMENT/THIS FITTING RESPONSE!!* =*IS AN ANCIENT GREEK NOTION* b. *INCLUDES A CHRONOLOGICAL!!!!!!! ASPECT TO IT: ITS THE RIGHT THING!!!!!!!!!!!! TO SAY!!!!!! and THE RIGHT TIMEEEEEEE!!! TO ACT!!!! c. *FOR EXAMPLE, FREDERICK DOUGLAS' RESPONSE HAD KAIROTIC!! PROPERTIES!!* =IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO SAY AND =AT THAT MOMENT, IT REALLY SPOKE TO THE RIGHT EVENTS AT THE TIME 2. *THE NOTION OF KAIROS IS ALSO RELATED TO THE MOMENT!!!!! OF OPPORTUNITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* a. *IS MOST OFTEN LINKEDDD TO ACTION!!!!! AND BATTLE!!!!!* b. *CONSIDER THE ANALOGY: "IS THE ARROW THAT'S BEEN SHOT JUST AT THE RIGHT MOMENT!!!! TO FIND PURCHASE UNDERNEATH SOMEONES ARMOR!!!!"* =SO IF U SHOT IT TOO SOON, IT BOUNCES OFF!!! THEIR ARMOR =IF YOU SHOT IT TOO LATE, IT BOUNCES OFF ALL TOGETHER c. *CONSIDER ANOTHER EXAMPLE: ANY SPORT HAS THE NOTION OF KAIROS SUCH AS BOXXXINGGG!!!!!!* =JUST WAITING FOR THAT RIGHT TIME TO THROW A PUNCH =IF U THROW IT TOO EARLY YOU MISS OR IF YOU WAIT TOO LONG, U GET HIT!!!! =ITS ALLL ABOUT UR TIMING AND WATCHING YOUR OPPONENTS TIMINGGG!! 3. *WHEN INVESTIGATING RHETORIC TEXT, WORTH IT TO ASK, "IS THIS RESPONSE A KAIROTIC RESPONSE?????????"* 4. *CONSIDER VIDEO!!! OF KAIROTIC MOMENT: JOE MCCARTHY, A US SENATOR, HAD REALLY GONE ON ATTACK IN SEARCHING OUT COMMUNISTS!!! IN THE US!!! AND HAD BUILT UP A LOT OF POWER IN A RHETORICAL BULLYINGGG!!! SORT OF WAY* a. *MCCARTHY GAINED A LOT OF PRESS!! AND POWER!! IN THE US BY BEING SUCH A STRONG ANTI-COMMUNIST!! FIGURE!!!!* b. *EVENTUALLY, HIS REACH EXTENDS BEYONDDD HIS GRASP* c. *THIS ALL LEADS TO HEARINGS!! WHICH IS SHOWN IN THE VIDEO* d. *MCCARTHY DIDNTTTT HAVE A KAIROTIC RESPONSEEE AND LOSTTTTTT!!! THE HEARING!!!* e. *HIS OPPOSING SIDE, THE US MILITARY, WONNN BC THEY HAD KAIROTIC RESPONSE!!* =FOUND THAT HE HAD A WEAK ONE W NO STRONG EVIDENCE AND THEY EVEUTALLY SAID, NO THATS ENOUGH! =SAYS WE'RE DONE ----------------------------------------- OVERALL RHETORICAL SITUATIONS ARE THESE EVOLVING!!! SITUATIONS BUT FOR A RHETOR, ITS ABOUT FINDINGGG!! WHATS JUUUUSTTTT THE RIGHT THING!!!! TO SAY AND THE RIGHT TIMING!!! TO DO IT!! =AS SOMEONE ANALZYING RHEOTICAL SPEECH//A CRITIC, WORTHY TO ASK URSELF "WHAT IS THE RHETORICAL SITUATION?" AND "WHY DID THAT NOTTT SUCCEED??" "WAS IT KAIROTIC??" "IF SO WHAT WAS THE CHARACTERISRICS OF IT THAT MADE IT SUCH A FITTIGN RESPONSE??

PROTECTED AND UNPROTECTED SPEECH TOPIC SUBSECTION: CAN THE NFL FIREE PLAYERS FOR KNEELING DURING THE NATIONAL ANTHEM???

•*CAN THE NFL FIREE PLAYERS FOR KNEELING DURING THE NATIONAL ANTHEM???* 1. *SINCE WE'RE TALKIN ABOUT WHATS LEGAL/ILLEGAL OR WHATS PROTECTED/UNPROTECTED, WE GET INTO THIS Q* a. *STARTED IN 2017 BUT STILLL CONTINUTES TO BE AN ISSUE* b. *BIG DEBATE: YOU CAN THINK BACK TO COLIN KAEPERNICK! WHO STARTEDD ALL OF THIS* c. *QUESTION IS: CAN THEY GET FIRED ORRRR IS THIS PROTECTED UNDER THEIRRRR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH* 2. *ANSWER TO THE QUESTION: YEAHH PROBABLY ! THE NFL ISNTTTT THE GOVERNMENT!* a. *WHYYY THE NFL CANNNNN PUNISH THEM FOR THEIR EXPRESSION OF SPEECH: BC THE NFL ISNNNTTT THE GOV'T* =NFL IS NOT THE FEDERAL GOV'T =WHY THEY CAN DO THAT: PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS CAN PROHIBIT SPEECH* b. *WHEN U THINK BACK TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT, WE'RE THINKING ABOUT WHAT ARE THE LIMITATIONS ON THE GOV'T W REGARDS TO THE CITIZENS* 3. *AFTER THE CONTROVERSY SPARKED, THE NFL IN 2018 MADE A POLICY!!!! THAT SAID YOU EITHER HAVEEEEEEE TO STANDDD DURING THE NATIONAL ANTHEM ORRRR STAY IN THE LOCKER ROOM* a. *THE PUNISHMENT WAS A GAME SUSPENSION!!* b. *WHY THEY CAN DO THAT: PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS CAN PROHIBIT SPEECH* =THEYRE NOTTT THE GOV'T 4. *BBUUUUT THERE MIGHT BE EITHER PLAYER CONTRACTS OR MAYBE SOME STATE ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAWS!!!!* a. *IT IS A LITTLE BIT MORRRRRE COMPLICATED CONSIDERING THAT IT IS THE NFL* =ALTHOUGH NFL ISS A PRIVATE ORGANIZATION, NFL HAS SOME PUBLICLYYYYYY FUNDED STADIUMS b. *THERE COULD BE SOME LIMITATIONS BUILT INTO THE PLAYERS CONTRACT!! AND THAT GETS INTO THE ISSUE OF LABOR RELATION LAW* =BUUUT ITS BEEN GOING ON SINCE 2017, WE HAVENT SEEN ANY MAJOR LEGAL FREEDOM OF SPEECH CHALLENGES ON THIS c. *^^^THATS BC PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS GET TO DO THIS* -IE: IF U WORKED AT STARBUCKS, THEY CAN PROBABLY FIRE U FOR NOTTTT WANTING TO WEAR UNIFORM "ive got a private moral objection to green" WELL STARBUCKS IS PRIVATE AND ITS NOT PROTECTED SPEECH -IE: WHEN MATT WAS FIRST GETTING HIRED AT UW, HE WAS ALSO APPLYING FOR SU!! AND THEY SAID, JUST TO BE CLEAR, IF WE DOO OFFER U A JOB, U NEED TO SIGN A STATEMENT OF BELIEF! YOU DIDNT NECESSARILY HAVEE TO BE CATHOLIC NOR CHRISTIAN. THE STATEMENT OF BELIEF WAS BASICALLY SAYING YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT YOURE GETTING INTO. ITS A CATHOIC UNIVERSITY. TOTALLY FINE! THEYRE A PRIVATE UNIVERSITY THEYRE NOTTT STATE FUNDED LIKE UW SO THEY GET TO GOVERN SOME OF THE SPEECH THAT HPAPENS IN THEIR ORGANIZATION uw wouldnt ask u to sign statement of belief bc theyre a state organization. BUT they wouldnt necessarily ask about religion BUT the uw used to have LOYALTY OATHS TO THE GOV'T WHERE THEY HAD TO SWEAR TO PROTECT GOV'T INSTITUTIONS IF U WANTED TO TEACH. BY 1955, WA STATE EMPLOYEES HAD TO SWEAR THAT THEY WERE NOT A TROUBLEMAKER PERSON. -IE: THE BEGGETT V BULLITT (1964) CASE!!! (connected to end of last example) CASE WHERE A WHOLE BUNCH OF STUDENTS CHALLENGED LOYALTY OATH TO GOV'T WHERE U SWEAR TO PROTECT GOV INSTITUTIONS AND UR NOT A TROUBLEMAKER AND IT FINALLY MAKES WAY TO SUPREME COURT WHERE THEY REVERSEDDDD THE LAW OF WA STATE REQUIRING EMPLOYEES TO TAKE THESE LOYALTY OATHS ^^REVERSED THEM NOTTTTTT ON THE BASIS OF FIRST AMENDMENT REASONS BUUUUT THEY REVERSED IT BC THE OATH WAS TOOOOO VAGUE! "IM NOT A SUBVERSIVE PERSON" IS KINDA VAGUE --------------------------------- OVERALL YA THEY CAN GET FIRED BC WHEN WE'RE TALKING BAOUT FIRST AMENDMENT ISSUES, MOST OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CITIZENS AND THE GOVT NOT NECESSARILY BETWEEN CONSUMERS AND PRIVATE ORGANIATIONS

PROTECTED AND UNPROTECTED SPEECH TOPIC SUBSECTION: CAN YOU POST HATE SPEECH ON SOCIAL MEDIA?

•*CAN YOU POST HATE SPEECH ON SOCIAL MEDIA?* 1. *SO WE'VE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE LATITUDE PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS HAVE WHEN IT COMES TO SPEECH ISSUES* a. *THEYRE PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS AND NOT THE GOV'T SO FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS DONTTT EXACTLY APPLY* -IE: NFL 2. *THE SAMEEEEE CAN BE APPLIED TO SOCIAL MEDIA!!!!* 3. *CAN YOU POST HATE SPEECH ON SOCIAL MEDIA?* a. *ANSWER: IT DEPENDS!!!!!* b. *BUT ANSWERING THE Q GETS US INTO....* =WHAT IS THE THRESHOLD WHERE YOU CANTTT POST HATE SPEECH ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND =HOW HAVE WE BUILTTT A POLICY FRAMEWORK!! AROUNDDD HATE SPEECH HERE IN THE US 4. *PLATFORMS, IN GENERAL, AREENTTTT LIABLE FOR CONTENT* a. *FOR EXAMPLE, FB OR TWITTERS TENDDD TO ACT LIKE PLATFORMSSS RATHER THAN PRODUCERS!!!* =THATS AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION =THEYRE NOTTT GENERATING THE CONTENT ON THEIR WEBSITES b. *THE PLATFORM IS NOTTTTTT LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE!!!!* c. *THE COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT (1996) OFFERS A LOT OF SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS SOMEEEE SIGNIFICANT PROTECTIONS!* =THE LAW STATES "NO PROVIDER OR USER OF AN INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SERVICE SHALL BE TREATED AS A PUBLISHER OR SPEAKER OF ANY KIND OF INFO PROVIDED BY ANOTHER INFORMATION CONTENT PROVIDER" aka the users =AKA ^^^ IF SOMEONE POSTS AN AWFUL VIDEO TO FACEBOOK, LEGALLY, THERES A LOT OF PROTECTION SET UP TO PROTECT FACEBOOK =IT ALSSSOOOOO MEANS THAT EVEN IFFFF SOMEONE LIKE FB/TWITTER/IG MODERATESSS CONTENT, THEY DONT SURRENDER THOSE CLAIMS!!! =^^^AKA THEY CANNN MODERATE CONTENT BUT STILL WILL BE PROTECTED 5. *SOOO PURE HATE SPEECH IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED AND IN ADDITION, TWITTER/FB/IG ARE NOTTTT LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTENT A USER POSTED THAT MIGHT CREATE LIABILITY FOR SOMETHING LIKE DEFAMATION!!!!* a. *BC THEYRE THE PLATFORM* b. *NOW WITHT THAT BEING SAID, ALL OF THAT IS KINDA IN FLUX* 6. *IT^^^ RAISES THE OTHER ISSUE OF SELF-CENSORING!!!! ON PLATFORMS!!!!* a. *EVEN PLATFORMS ARENT RESPONSIBLE FOR HATE SPEECH, IFFFF LOTSSS OF PPL POST HATE SPEECH ON A PLATFORM THEN THEY WILL TAKE A HUUUUGE FINANCIAL HIT!!!* -IE: HELLA NAZIS POSTIN HATE SPEECH ON FB =EVEN IF ITS LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE, ITS NOTTTTTTT SOCIALLY DESIRABLE b. *THEERREEEFOREEEE, A LOT OF PLATFORMS SELF-CENSOR!!!!!* =PLATFORMS R IN THE POSITITION OF TAKING DOWN A LOT OF CONTENT =EVEN IF THE CONTENT ISSS LEGAL BC THEYRE PRIVATE c. *ONE CONCERN FROM FREE SPEECH ADVOCATES: PLATFORMS ARE OVER REACHINGGGG!!! IN THEIR DESIRE TO AVOID CONFRONTATION!* d. *CONSIDER THE AUDIO RECORDING OF A MOSQUE SHOOTING AND THE IMAGE BOARD "H-AIM"* ="SHORTLY AFTER SHOOTING, A USER ON THE WEBSITE H-AIM POSTED A BEFORE AND AFTER PICTURE W THE BEFORE PIC OF A GOOFY LOOKING WHITE GUY AND THE AFTER PIC BEING THE SAME GUY IN SWAT GEAR BURSTING THRU THE MOSQUE DOOR W A WEAPON.. A JOURNLAIST TALKS ABOUT HOWWW THESE SHOOTERS R RECRUITED ON THE WEBSITE H-AIM " =TO SUM UP ITS A WAY OF SAYING HATE SPEECH ON SOCIAL MEDIA RAISE ISSUES AROUND FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS IN THE US AND HOW WE WANNA REPSOND TO IT --------------------------------------------- OVERALL ====A LOT OF OUR LAWS IN THE US DEVELOP ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT FREE SPEECH IS EXXPENSIVE!!!* =SO IT USED TO BE EXPENSIVE AND DIFFICULT TO DISTRIBUTE IDEAS TO A WIDE AUDIENCE -IE: PHAMPLETS!! U HAD TO PRINT OUT HELLA AND THEYRE NOT CHEAP (ESP A LONGG TIME AGO WHEN THAT WAS THE ONLY WAY OF DISTRIBUTING INFO ====WE HAVE SOO MUCH COMMODITY NOW THAT WHATS EXPENSIVE IS PUBLIC ATTENTION!!!* =OUR LAWS ARE ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GOVERNMENT ANDCITIZENS AND NOW COMMUNICATION IS IN A PUBLIC SQUARE THATS PRIVATELY OWNED BY SOCIAL MEDIA SPACES =SO CERTAINLY THE US'S FIRSTTT AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS AREEEE CHHANNNGGGGINGGGGG AS WE EXTEND OUR POLICY ONTO SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS =IF U LOOK ON EUROPE, ITS DIF TO CONCLUDE: THIS IS A VERRRRYY DIFFEREENT SITUATION FROM WHAT OUR FOUNDERS HAD EXPERIENCED WHEN THEY WROTE THE AMENDMENTS

OWNERSHIP AND PUBLIC INTEREST TOPIC SUBSECTION: CONCENTRATIONS IN MEDIA SYSTEMS

•*CONCENTRATIONS IN MEDIA SYSTEMS BACKGROUND!!!* 1. *CONCENTRATIONS A BIG ISSUE FOR BOTHH NATIONAL!! AND INTERNATIONAL!! MARKETS!!* a. *MANY WESTERN COUNTRIES ARE DEALIN W SOME OF THE SAME ISSUES OF NATIONAL MEDIA CONCENTRATION!!* -IE: NEWSPAPER OWNERSHIP IN NEW ZEALAND IS REALLY DOMINATED BY LIKE FOUR MAJOR COMPANIES!! REALLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE DOMESTIC READERSHIP IS TIED TO DOMESTICALLY CONTROLLED PAPERS. !!!!! MOST OF THE OWNERSHIP IS OUTSIDE!! OF NEW ZEALAND!!!!! -IE: BRITAIN!! SIMILARLY HAS THE SAMEE CONCENTRATEDDD NEWSPAPER OWNERSHIPS AROUND!! -IE: CANADAS MEDIA CONSOLIDATION STARTED A LITTLE BIT LATER IN THE 90S AND THEY HELD ONTO RESTRICTIONS ABOUT OWNERSHIP !!1 FOR AWHILE!! IN AN ATTEMPT TO LIMIT WHAT NEW ZEALAND HAS!! LIMIT FOREIGN COMPANIES FROM DOMINATING CANADIAN MEDIA!! T b. *THOSE RESTRICTIONS ARE NO LONGER QUITE AS STRONG BUT THEY DO REQUIRE SOME THINGS STILL IN CANADA LIKE 80% OF THE BOARD OF THE DIRECTORS FOR A MEDIA COMPANY STILL NEED TO BE CANADIAN!!* 2. *SO, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CONCENTRATION OF MEDIA SYSTEMS, WE CAN TALK ABOUT 2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BIG THINGS!!* a. *THE FIRST THING: VERTICAL INTEGRATION!!!!* =up and own =can look back to andrew carnagy (railroad magnate who buys mines!! and railways and processing plants) BASICALLY HE WAS BUYING EVERYTHING HE NEEDED TO GET THE PRODUCT OUTTA THE GROUND, TRANSPORT IT OUT OF COUNTRY, REFINE IT ,AND DISTRIBUTE IT TO BUYERS!!!* =THATS THE CLASSIC NOTION OF VERTICAL INTEGRATION =NOW IN MEDIA, THIS AMOUNTS TO CONTROLLING THE PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND EXHIBITION OF MEDIA PROPERTIES!! b. *THE SECOND THING: HORIZONTAL INTEGRATION!!!* =CUTS ACROSS =IS PURCHASING OTHER OUTLETS AT THE SAME! LEVEL OF PRODUCTION!! =SO IN MEDIA, THIS WOULD MEAN OWNING STATIONS OR MEDIA OUTLETS IN MULTIPLE MARKETS!! b. *BOOOTHHHHH VERTICAL AND HORIZONTOL INTEGRATION WERE LIMMITTEDDDDD HERE IN THE US FOR A V LONG TIME!!* ---------------------------------------------- •*VERTICAL INTEGRATION!!* 1. *VERTICAL INTEGRATION DEFINITION: CONTROLLING, PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND EXHIBITION!!!!!!!!!* 2. *SO WHEN WE THINK ABOUT THIS, WE CAN START THINKING ABOUT EARLYYYY MOVIE THEATERS HERE IN THE US!!!!!* a. *PRODUCTION COMPANIES WERE BUYINGGG MOVIE THEATERS TO ONLYY SHOW THEIR MOVIES* b. *THE GOV'T STEPPED IN AND SAID, "YOU CANTTTTTT DO THAT* c. *PRODUCTION COMPANIES THAT DIDDNTT OWN MOVIE THEATERS WERENTT ABLE TO SHOW THEIR STUFF ANYWHERE* =SO IF U MADE A MOVIE AND TDIDNT OWN A MOVIE THEATER, YOU DIDNT HAVE ANY PLAC EOT SHOW IT d. *THIS WAS BACK IN THE 1930S!* =THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK WAS MORE VAGUE THAN IT IS NOW =THIS WAS POST DEPRESSION 3. *BUUUUT THERE WAS AN UPTAKE IN BUSINESS REGULATIONS IN THE 1930S!!!!!!* a. *ONE OF THE THINGS THEY DID: YOU CANT HAVE THAT KIND OF INTEGRATIVE CONTROL^^^* 4. *THIS SETS THE GROUNDWORK FOR WHAT CONTINUES TO DEVELOP ON THE US!!!* a. *ONE OF THE BIG!!!! THING THAT COMES TO TV BROADCAST AS A WAY TO PREVENT VERTICAL INTEGRATION: LAWS PREVENTED!!! THREEEE!!!!! MAJOR NETWORKS!!!!! FROM!!!! FINANCIAL INTEREST OR SYNDICATION RIGHTS IN THE SHOWS THEY ARIED!!!!!!!!!!* =THESE ARE OFTEN CALLED THE FIN/SYN RULES!!!! b. *SO THE BIG THREE!!! NETWORKS ARE: NBC ABC, CBS!!!* c, *THE FIN/SYN RULES RESTRICTTTT THOSE BIG THREE NETWORKS FROM.....* -*FIRST:* HAVING CONTROL OVER THE PRODUCTION!!! FROM THE SHOWS THEYRE AIRING!!!!!! -*SECOND:* MAKE MONEY OFF OF SYNDICATION RIGHTS THAT YOURE AIRING *THIRD:* YOU MUSTTT ONLYYYY BE IN THE POSITION OF JUST BROADCASTING THEIR SHOWS -*FOURTH:* YOU CAN ONLYY MAKE MONEY OFF OF ADVERTISING!!!! BUT ITS GONNA BE ADVERTISING AND NOTTTT NECESSARILY THE PRODCUTION OF THOSE SHOWS d. *WHY ARE THOSE RULES MADE????* =IN ORDER TO AVOIDDDDDD A MONOPOLY OF BROADCASTING AND CONTENT -IE:IF NBC OWNSSSS THE PRODUCTION AND MEANS OF DISTRIBUTION, THEN THE IDEA IS THEY GOT A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A MONOPOLISTIC CONTROL OV THE CONTENT THATS BEING DISTRIBUTED 5. *NOW, THE 90S KINDA SAW THIS BIG DISMANTLE!! AROUND THE FINANCIAL INTERESTS IN SYNDICATION RULES!!!* a. *WHY??? BC OF CABLE!!!!* =HERE WAS WHEN THERE STARTED BEING A LOTTTTTT OF CABLE NETWORKS AND STATIONS , b. *IT REDUCED!!!!!!!! THE FEAR THAT THOSE BIG!! THREE NETWORKS (NBC, ABC, CBS) WERE JUST GONNA DOMINATE EVERYTHING!!* =YOUVE GOT ALL TEHSE DIFERENT CHANNELS SO THE IDEA THAT THEYRE GONNA BE ABLE TO MONOPOLIZE EVERYONES SCREEN DECREASES 6. *THEREFORE, THIS CHANGE CAUSED THE FIN/SYN RULES TO RELAXXX!!!!* a. *AND BEFORE THE CHANGE, THE BIG THREE WERE LIMITED TO PRODUCING ONLLYYY 20% OF WHAT THEY AIRED!!* =THEY HAD TO BUY PROGRAMS FROM ELSE WHERE IN ORDER TO AIR THEM b. *THEN, 10 YEARS LATER AAFFFTERRRR THESE FIN/SYN RULES ARE RELAXEDDDDDD, THE THREE MAJOR NETWORKS PRODUCE MORE NOW!!*! -IE: CBS IS NOW PRODUCES 90% OF ITS OWN CONTENT COMPARED TO 20% DURING THE FIN/SYN RULES =THIS IS OBVIOUSLY TRUE FOR CABLE AS WELL WHICH THEY GREW OUT OF THIER OWN PRODUCTION STUDIOS 7. *SO WITH THOSE RULES GONE, YOUVE GOT INCREASED VERTICAL INTEGRATION!!!!!!! (NNOOTTTTTT ONLYYYY WITH CHANNELLS, BUT YOU CAN CERTAINLY THINK OF DISNEY HERE)* a. *DISNEY IS AN EXAMPLE OF EXCELLENCE!!!!!! HERE!!!* =THEYRE JUST CONTINUALLY TRYING TO BUY UP ALL THESE PROPERTIES!!!!!! b. * BUUUUT, EVEN IF WE DONT THINK ABOUT MAJOR MEDIA COMBINATION, LIKE DISNEY, YOU CAN ALSO LOOK AT EVEN STILL SOME OF THE MAJOR NETWORKS!!* c. *WHY WOULD A NETWORK WANNA DO THIS??* =IT MEANS THAT THE NETWORK CAN SAVE MONEY ON PRODUCTION AND EVEN EARN MOREEEE MONEY THRY SYNDICATION!!!* d. *CONSIDER THE EXAMPLE: NBC MADE THE AMERICAN VERSION OF THE OFFICE!! THERE ARE TONS OF MONEY ON SELLING ADVERSTISING, RUNNING THAT SHOW!!!!! THENNNNNN THEY MADE EVEN MOREEE MONEY ON SELLING THE SYNDICATION RIGHTS TO SMALLERS STATIONS!!!!!* =THE CASE STUDY OF THE OFFICE WAS A MONEY MAKER FOR NBC!!! e. *BUUUUUUUT, IT WAS A MONEYMAKER IN WAYS!! THAT IT WOULDVEEEEEE BEEN PROHIBITED YEARSSS AGO!!* (up until the early 90s before the rules were relaxesd) =BC THOSE FIN/SYN RULES RESTRICTED THEM FROM PRODUCING AND SYNDICATING ON THE PRODUCTION SIDE AND THE SYNDICATION SIDE ------------------------------------------------- •*HORIZONTAL!! INTEGRATION!!!* 1. *HORIZONTAL INTEGRATION DEFINITION: REFERS TO PURCHASING!!!!OTHER OUTLETS AT THE SAME LEVEL!!!! OF PRODUCTION!!!!* a. *FOR THIS, YOU CAN THINK OF MEDIA COMPANIES TRYING TO BUY UP!! THESE DIFFERENT STATIONS IN DIFFERENT LOCALS!!!!* 2. *WHENNN THE FIRST AMENDMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WAS DEVELOPED, THE COST FOR OWNERSHIP!! ARE PRETTY LOW!!!* -IE: SO OWNING A PRINTING PRESS ISNT CHEAP BUT ITS DOABLE! a. *SO THERE WERE SOME DIFFERENCES* -IE: IF U WERE RUNNING A SMALL NEWSPAPER, THERE WERE SOME DIFFERENCES IN SCALE COMPARED TO A BIG NEWSPAPER AND UR SMALL ONE b. *BUUUUUUTTTTTT THESE WERENNNTTTTTT MASSIVE DIFFERENCES THAT COULDNTTT BE OVERCOME* c. *IN CONTRAST, THERE ISSSSSSSS A MASSIVE DIFFERENCEEE!!! WITH RUNNING A TV STATION WITH MASSIVE PRODUCTION!!!!* =THE DIFFERENCE IN AUDIENCES BETWEEN A CABLE ACCESS SHOW!!! -IE: RAINYDAWG'S AUDIENCE VS DAVID DOBRIK'S THE VIEW AUDIENCE d. *WE'RE WALKING INTO IT WITH UNEQUAL ABILITIES TO PACK THE MARKET!!* 3. *THERE USEDDDD TO BE PROHIBITIONS ON OWNERSHIP!!! WITHIN A CITY* =AKA HOW MUCH A COMPANY CAN OWN MEDIA OUTLETS WITHIN A CITY =AANDDDDD ON CROSS OWNERSHIPS!!! 4. *PRIORR TO THE 1990S (AKA BEFOREEE FIN/SYN RULE WAS RELAXED) A SINGLE COMPANY COULDNTTTTTTTT OWN BOTHHHHH A DAILY NEWSPAPER!! AND A BROADCAST OUTLET!!! IN A SINGLE CITY!!! (EXCEPT THE 20 LARGEST MEDIA MARKETS like new york, chicago, and alike)!!!* a. *THIS AIM WAS ANOTHER!!!! WAY TO PREVENTING LOCAL MARKET MONOPOLIES!!!* =IF U HAD ONE COMPANY THAT OWNED A TV STATION IN TOWN AND OWNED THE MAJOR NEWSPAPER IN TOWN, THEN THE FEAR WAS "HEY, WHOEVER OWNED THOSE TWO COMPANIES IS GONNA BE ABLE TO BASICALLY DOMINATEEE ALL THE REPORTING IN THAT CITY BC THEY HAVE HORIZONTAL CONTORL OV THAT LOCAL MEDIA MARKET b. *AGAIN, THE 1996 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT REALLLYYYY RELAXES SOME OF THESE RESTRICTIONS ON HORIZONTAL OWNERSHIP!!!* c. *AS A RESULT, FOR EXAMPLE, ONE COMPANY THAT GROWS A LOT IS THE SINCLAR!!!!! BROADCAST!!! GROUP (SBG)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* =THEY OWN 193 STATIONS IN 100 DIFFERENT MARKETS =LOCALLY IN SEATTLE, THEY OWN KOMO!!!! =THEYVE KINDA GOTTEN IN TROUBLE!!!!!!!! FOR THE FEARS PEOPLE USED TO HAVE AND WHYYYYYY WE HAVE LAWS AGAINSTTTT HORIZONTAL OWNERSHIP!!! =THEY GOT IN TROUBLE FOR POLITICAL BIAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -*RECALL THE CLIP OF MULTIPLE SBG OWNNED STATIONS:* BASICALLY WHAT HAPPENED WAS SINCLAIR REQUIRED ITS LOCAL ANCHORS TO RECORD PROMOS WHERE THEY DENOUNCED THE TROUBLING TREND OF IRRESPONSIBLE ONE-SIDED NEWS STORIES PLAGUING THE COUNTRY AND SO THERE WAS NOOO ANNOUNCEMENT SINCLAIR REQUIRED THIS OF THE ANCHORS AND IT KINDA LOOKED LIKE IT WAS THE LOCAL NEWS STATION DECIDING TO TAKE A STAND ON THESE ISSUES =^^^SINCLAIR/SBG RESPONDED THAT THEY WERE WANTING TO WARN VIEWERS ABOUT THE DANGERS OF FAKE NEWS THAT WERE CIRCULATING ON SOCIAL MEDIA !!! d. *MANY MEDIA CRITICS REACTED TO WHAT SINCLAIR DID BY SAYING SINCLAIR WAS TAKING ADVANTAGE THEIR PLATFORM TO REINFORCE A TALKING POINT PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS MAKING AT THE TIME!! which were allegations that mainstream news cant be trusted* e. *AGAIN, THERE WAS NOOO ANNOUNCEMENT FROM SINCLAIR THAT THIS WAS FROM THE ORGANIZATION HEAD IN THE COMPANY!!* f. *SO THIS WAS KINDA ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT RULES AGAINST VERTICAL INTEGRATION//HORIZONTAL INTEGRATION!! WE'RE TRYING TO PREVENT!!* ----------------------------- OVERALL EVEN WITHOUTT FORMAL MEDIA CONCENTRATION, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE CONSONENCE OF MEDIA CONTENT (BASICALLY, MAJOR MEDIA OUTLETS TEND TO REPLICATE FAMILIAR FORMATS) =SO A SITCOM USUALLY LOOKS THE SAME REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ITS MADE BY DISNEY OR CBS =WE'VE TALKED ABOUT PACK JOURNALISM AND THE TRAINING PROCEDURE FOR JOURNALISTS THAT KINDA ADDS TO THIS NOTION OF MEDIA CONTETNENT =MODERN MEDIA CONTENT, THE STORY OF A LOT OF WESTERN MEDIA SYSTEMS IS THE INCREASING CONCENTRATION OF OWNERSHIP, BOTH VERTICALLY AND HORIZONTALLY

MEDIA REGULATIONS TOPIC SUBSECTION: COPYRIGHT

•*COPYRIGHT* 1. *HERE IS ANOTHER AREA OF MEDIA POLICY!!!* 2. *DEFINITION: COPYRIGHT IS ENFORCED BY GOVERNMENTAL LAWS AND MAKES IT ILLEGAL TO COPY AND SELL MATERIAL WITHOUT PERMISSION!!!!* a. *COPYRIGHT IS SIMPLY A BRANCH OF LAW THAT PROVIDES PROPERTY RIGHTS INN EXPRESSION!!!* b. *THIS IS WHAT ALLOWS COMPANIES TO MAKE MONEY OFF OF THEIR BOOK PRODUCTS!!! AND NOTTT HAVE SOMEONE ELSE STEAL IT* 3. *COPYRIGHT ONLLLLYYYYYY PROTECTS EXPRESSSSIONNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (NNNOTTTTTT THE IDEASSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BEING EXPRESSED)* a. *AKA COPYRIGHT ONLY PROTECTS THINGS WHEN IT TAKES FORM IN SOME TYPE OF PERMANENT, MATERIAL EXPRESSION!!!* -IE: PHOTOGRAPHS, MOVIES, RECORDINGS =^^AKA SOMETHING THAN CAN BE POTENTIALLY REPRODUCED!!!!! b. *IN OPPOSITION, COPYRIGHT DOESNNTTT PROTECT IDEAS BEING EXPRESSED* -IE: SO THIS EFFECTS STUFF LIKE NEWS MEDIA! IF A NEWSPAPER BREAKS A STORY, THEY DONT OWNNNN THE STORY. NOOO INDIVIDUAL COMPANY CAN OWN THE IDEA c. *A BETTER EXAMPLE* -IE IF A PHILOSOPHER COMES UP W THE IDEA, THEY MIGHT OWN THE EXPRESSION!!!! RIGHT THEY MIGHTT HAVE THE COPYRIGHT ON THAT BOOK BUUUUUT ONCE THEIR IDEAS OUT THERE, ITS OUT THERE 4. *A COPYRIGHT IS NOTTTTTTTTTT A PATENT* a. *COPYRIGHT AND TRADEMARK LAW IS DIFFERENT!!!! FROM PATENTS* =COPYRIGHT/TRADEMARK LAWS ARE AREAS ARE CONCERNED WITH HOW THINGS LOOK! OR HOW THEYRE EXPRESSSED OR PRESENTED b. *PATENT LAWS REALLY CONCERNED WITH HOW THINGS WORRRK!!!!!!!!!!* -IE: YOUVE GOT A PATENT ON A DEVICE THAT DOESSS SOMETHING!! PATENTS CONTROL HOW THE DEVICE WORKS!!!! instead of the expression of the device 5. *KEEP IN MIND, THE COPYRIGHT IS STILLL A NEW THING* a. *FOR MOST OF HUMAN HISTORY, YOU COULD EASILLYYY REPRODUCE STUFF!!! WITHOUTTTT PERMISSION* -IE: THE EARLY DAYS OF THE PRINT REVOLUTION. EURO GOVTS ARE SEEKNG TO CONTROL BOOK PIRACY!!!! ONE WAY THEYRE ABLE TO DO THAT IS ISSUE LICENSES!! TO CERTAIN PUBLISHERS!!!! publishers, btw, are who govts want to encourage IN EXCHANGE, THE PUBLISHER SAYS, IF IM LICENSED, I AGREE NOTTTT TO PUBLISH SEDITIOUS OR HEREDICAL, COPIIEDDD WORK. =^^ITS SORT OF A TRADE OFF WHICH YOUVE GOT THIS EARLY IDEA WHERE U GET THE RIGHT TO PUBLISH IT AND TOU CAN EARN MONEY OFF OF THAT 6. *INTERNATIONAL TRADE PRESENTED PROBLEMS!!!!!!* a. *CONSIDER THE CARTOON SHOWING A PIRATE PUBLISHER!!!!* =AKA A LITERAL PIRATE ON A BOAT WHOS A PUBLISHER TO REPRESENT SOMEONE WHO REPUBLISHES BOOKS IN ANOTHER COUNTRY WITHOUT SECURING RIGHTS OR ENGAGING IN ANY PAYMENT!!!! =THEY GO OVER TO ENGLAND, THEY SAY "BOY THISIS A GOOD BOOK I THINK ILL PRINT A VERSIONOF IT AND PRINT ALL THE MONEY!! DESSPITTTEEE HAVING NOTHING DOING W THE PRODUCTION OR CREATION OF THAT BOOK =THEYRE JUST REPUBLSIHING IT AND EARNING THE MONEY IN A DIFFERENT MARKET b. *THIS SITUATION GIVES RISE TO THE BERNE CONVENTION (1886)!!!!!!!!* =THIS IS WHERE SOME OF THE EARLIEST GUIDELINES!! ON PROPERTY WAS MADE! =CREATED AN INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT TREATY!!! c. *INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT TREATY!!! HAS THREE BASIC RULES:* -*RULE #1:* FOREIGN WORK SHOULD BE GRANTED THE SAME PROTECTION AS DOMESTIC WORK -*RULE #2:* THERE SHOULDNT BE ANY FORMAL REQUIREMENTS BEFORE OBTAINING A PROTECTION!!!* -*RULE #3:* SOMETINGS SHOULD BE PROTECTED IN YOUR COUNTRY EVEN IF IT ISNT PROTECTED UNDER COPYRIGHT IN ITS COUNTRY OF ORIGIN d. *INITIALLY, THE US WANTED TO PROTECT COPYRIGHT AND PATENTS THAT ORIGINATED IN THE US* =BUT THEY REFUSED THOSE PROTECTIONS TO FOREIGN WORK e. *RESULTED IN BERNE CONVENTION TO SAY TO THE US, "YOUUU CANNTTTTTTTT DO THAT"!!!!* f. *THE BERNE CONVENTION BASICALLY!!! PRIVILEGES THE IDEA THAT COPYRIGHT SHOULDNTTTT END AT THE COUNTRY BORDER!!!!!* =IT IS AN INTERNATIONALLLL!!! TREATTY!!!* g. *IS VERY MUCH STILL A KEY IDEA* =INITIALLY, THERE WERE 58 COUNTRIES THAT AGREED TO THE BERNE CONVENTION!! =NOW UPTO 178 h. *HOWEVER, HOW CLOSELYYY THE EACH GOVERNMENT MONITORS COPYRIGHT DESPITE AGREEING TO THE BERNE CONVENTION VARIES!!* -IE: GOING TO ANOTHER COUNTRY AND FINDING THAT ITS EASY TO FIND PIRATED STUFF 7. *ONCE A WORK HAS ACHIEVED A COPYRIGHT, THE COPYRIGHT OWNER MUUUSTTT GRANT PERMISSION FOR THAT WORK TO BE LEGALLYYY!! REPRODUCED!!!* a. *AFTER A CERTAIN NUMBER OF YEARS, THE COPYRIGHT EXXPIRRESSS!!!* =THEN, IT ENTERS THE PUBLIC DOMAIN b. *THEREFORE, BOOKS IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN CAN HAVE PREVIOUSLY COPYRIGHTED STUGFF* =BC THEIR COPY RIGHT EXPIRED c. *REFER TO THE COPYRIGHT ACT OF 1790!!!!: IT SAYS, AUTHORS HAVE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO THEIR WORK FOR 14 YEARS!!!! AND ITS RENEWABLE ONCE WHILE THEYRE STILL ALIVE* =AFTER THAT, THEIR WORK ENTERS THE DOMAIN d. *BERNE CONVENTION STATES IT SHOULD BE LONGER!!!!! SAYS AUTHORS SHOULD HAVE LIFE LONG RIGHTS!!! PLUSSS A MINIMUM OF 50 YEARS!!!!* COULD BE EXTENDED AFTER 50 YEARS e. *ADDITIONALLY, COPYRIGHT EXTENSION ACT OF 1998 IN THE US!! ALSO SAYS OTHERWISE!! STATES THAT ITS 70 YEARS (IF ITS IS AN INDIVIDUAL) AND 120 YEARS!!! FOR A CORPORATE AUTHOR!!!* =THIS IS ALSO CALLED THE MICKEY MOUSE PROTECTION ACT!!!! =^^BC IT FROZEEE!! PUBLIC DOMAIN WORKS IN THE US!! f. *DISNEY WAS ONE OF THE ONES THAT BENEFITTED FROM THIS^^^^* =DISNEY WAS GETTING READY TO ENTER THE DOMAIN AND THE FREEZING DELAYED THAT!!!!! g. *INDUSTRIAL GROUPS ARE OFTEN FIGHTING FOR MOREEE AND MOREE STRINGENT COPYRIGHT PROTECTIONS* =U MIGHT BE VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIESE -IE: RECORDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA!! -IE: MOTION PICTURE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA =THEYRE ALWAYS TRYING TO MAKE IT HARDER FOR PPL TO PIRATE CREATIVE WORKS! =THISIS MUCH BIGGER CONSIDERATION NOW! h. *TECHNOLOGY MAKES IT A LOT EASIER TO GET WORKS AND TO REPRODUCE THEM!* -IE: CASSETTE TAPES WAS ONE OF THE BIG CONCERNS INITIALLY AROUND PIRACY!! BC IT WAS PRESENT DURING THE START OF THE TECHNOLOGICAL REVOLUTION!! SO IF U HAVE A CASETTE TAPE, YOU COULD RECORD!!! =PRIOR TO THE CASSETTE TAPE, IT WAS REALLY DIFFICULT TO RECORD STUFF U HAD TO LIKE PRESS AN ALBUM =W CASSETTE TAPES, U COULD JUST BRING A HAND HELD TAPE RECORDER!!! AND YOU CAN JUST TAPE SONGS FROM THE RADIO N HAD TO LIKE SKIP THE ANNOUNCER ON TEH RADIO. YOUD HAVE TO HOPE UR SONG CAME ON THE RADIO i. *PEER TO PEER SHARING NETWORKS TRIED TO GET AROUND SOME OF THESE COPYRIGHT PROTECTIONS!!* =BASCIALLY WHAT THEY SAID WAS ALL WE'RE DOING IS CONNECTING USERS INSTEAD OF THE FILES THEMSELVES =THAT DIDNT WORK!!! =PLACES LIKE NAPSTER ISNT THERE ANYMORE 8. *THIS LEADS TO THE DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT OF 1998!! AKA DMCA* a. *WHAT THIS DOES IS IT PROHIBITS INDIVIDUALS FROM GETTING AROUND COPYRIGHT PROTECTION!! MEASURES!!* =U CANT USE CODE CRACKING DEVICES TO ILLEGALLY COPY SOFTWARE =STUFF LIKE WEBSITES HAVE TO TAKE DOWN COPYRIGHTED MATIERALS b. *ONE OF THE INTERESTINGS THINGS, WHILE WEBSITES HAVE TO TAKE DOWN COPYRIGHTED MATERIALS, THEY DONTTTTT HAVE TO MONITOR THEIR OWN CONTENT* =YOUVE NO DOUBT COME ACROSS THIS -IE: THERE WAS A 3 YEAR LONG COURT BATTLE BETWEEN VIACOM!!! AND YOUTUBE!!! OVER YOUTUBE USERS POSTING COPYRIGHTED MATEIRAL!!! viacom said u needa take it down and thats why theres so many videos on youtube that said it was taken down bc of copyright reasons 9. *THERE ARE OTHER WAYS OF THINKING ABOUTTTT COPYRIGHT (not necessarily ways around it)* a. *YOU MAY HAVE HEARD OF CREATIVE COMMONS!!* =IN THIS CLASS, MOST OF THE PICS U SEE ARE CREATIVE COMMONS PICTURES BC U HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL =IF MATT IS PRODUCING LECTURE MATERUAL, HE DOESNT WANNA BE IN VIOLATION OF COPYRIGHT b. *CREATIVE COMMONS IS ONE WAY OF GETTING AROUND COPYRIGHT* =CREATIVE COMMON CONSIST OF USERS WHO BASICALLY SAY, "I CAN STIPULATE WHAT I WANT MY COPYRIGHT ON THIS WORK TO BE!!! IF ITS FINE FOR BEING JUST SHARED BROADLY, WITH ATTRIBUTION, IF U CAN USE IT IN A COMMERICAL PROPERTY" -IE: IF U GO TO PIXELBEAR, PPL CAN SAY THIS WORK IS FREE AND TOHERS ARE FREE TO REMIX IT U DONT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT MIXNG UP OR READJUSTING THE IMAGE c. *CREATIVE COMMONS IS WAY OF TRYING TO NAVIGATE AROUND SOME OF THESE ISSUES FOR COPYRIGHT* 10 .*FAIR USE!!! ALLOWS FOR SOME LIMITED COPYING!!! OF A WORK FOR THE PURPOSE OF REPORTING, RESEARCH, COMMENT, AND CRITICISM!!!* a. *ONCE AGAIN, THE US PROTECTS THE EXPRESSION OF OPINION!* =UNDER COPYRIGHT, U CAN REUSE SOME WORK FOR COMMENTING ON IT -IE: FOR CRITUEING IT, OR FOR THE USE OF EDUCATION!! A LOT OF TEACHERS USE FAIR USE "FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES" b. *FAIR USE IS OK BC..* =UR NOT REPRODUCING TOO MUCH OF IT, YOURE NOT UNDERMINING THE FINANCIAL ABILITIES OF THE WORK --------------------------------------------- OVERALL THE NATURE OF CREATIVE WORK IS INTERNATIONAL =AND MATTERS OF COPYRIGHT R RLLY FRONT N CENTER IN THE US SINCE IN THE US, WE PRODUCE AND CONSUME MORE INTELLECTUAL PROPEERTY THAN ANY OTHER NATION =SO COPYRIGHT IS A PARTICULAR CONCERN FOR AMERICANS AND ESP AMERICAN COMAPNIES

THE FIRST AMENDMENT TOPIC SUBSECTION: DEFAMATION

•*DEFAMATION BACKGROUND!!!!!* 1. *AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ABRIDGEMENTS, THERES TIMES WHEN WE SAY, FREEDOM OF SPEECH DOESSS HAVE ITS LIMITS!!!* 2. *ONE OF THE ISSUES WE COME ACROSS IS DEFAMATION!!!* ---------------------------------- •*DEFAMATION* 1. *DEFINITION: A FALSE STATEMENT THAT IS COMMUNICATED TO THIRD PERSONS AND CAUSES!!!! HARM!!!!!!! TO THE REPUTATION OF THE PERSON WHO WAS THE SUBJECT* a. *ITS DAMAGING SPEECHR REALLY AIMED AT DAMAGING SOMEONES REPUATION* 2. *DEFAMATION TYPICALLY COMES IN TWO FLAVORS!!!* a. *FLAVOR #1: LIBEL!!!!!!!* =REFERS TO PERMANENT!!!!! FORM!! =STUFF THATS GONNA BE PUBLISHEDD!! -IE: WRITING, DRAWING such as editorial cartoonists b. *FLAVOR #2: SLANDER!!!!!* =REFERS TO TRANSITORY FORM (ORAL) =AKA THATS HEARD AND CANNOT BE REPEATED NOR PROVED!!! c. *SOMETIMES PEOPLE SAY LIBEL IS WRITING AND SLANDER IS SPOKEN!!!!* =THATS MORE OR LESS TRUE =THE ISSUE IS IS IT SOMETHING THATS IN A PERMANANT FORM OR TRANSITORY FORM (thats heard once and cant he proved/repeated) =IF I SAY SOMETHING SLANDEROUS DOES IT QUICKLY PASS OUT OF THE HUMAN RECORD ?? ITS NOT MEMORIALIZED 3. *WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DEFAMATION, WE'RE TALKING MORE ABOUT CIVIL!!! RATHER THAN CRIMINAL PENALITIES!!* a. *IT MATTERS MORE SOCIALLY!! THAN IT DOES TO THE LAW* 4. *FOR THE MOST PART, THE SUPREME COURT HASNNTTT HAD A WHOLE BUNCH OF DEFAMATION CASES BUUUT WE DOOO HAVE A FEW!!!* a. *STATES DEAL MORE W IT RATHER THAN SUPREME COURT* 5. *ONE SUPREME COURT CASE: HOW DEFAMATION APPLIES WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUBLIC PERSONS!!!//PUBLIC OFFICIALS!!!!!* a. *PUBLIC OFFICIALS MUUUSTTT SHOWWWW ACCTTAULLLLL MALICE!* =PUBLIC OFFICALS HAVE A HIGHERRR BURDEN OF PROOF THAN SOMEONE WHOS NOTTTTT A PUBLIC OFFICIAL* -IE: THE SEATTLE TIMES RUNS SOMETHING AS YOU, ITS LIBELOUS!!! YOU HAVE A LOWER STANDARD OF PROOF TO PROVE!!! THANNNN WOULD THE GOVERNOR OR MAYOR =FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS TO SHOW DEFAMATION, THEY HAVE TO PROVE ACTUAL MALICE MEANING THEYD HAVE TO PROVE THAT THE SEATTLE TIMES WAS PUBLISHING WITH THE KNOWWLEDDGEEE!! OF FALSITY!!! OF THE INFORMATION THAT THEY WERE PUBLISHING orr THEY WERE DOING SO W RECKLESS DISREGARD FOR THE TRUTH -IE: for mayor to sue seattle, times, mayor must prove that they actually didnt believe what they were publushing THAT REALLY REQUIRES PROSECUATION TO GET INTO HEAD OF THE PERSON TO PROVE MALICE ^^^TAHTS A V HIGH STANDARD b. *SOOOO BASICALLY, PUBLIC OFFICIALS HAVE TO PROVE THAT THERES AN EXTREME CASE OF DEFAMATION!!!! IN ORDER FOR THERE TO BE PUNISHMENT!!!* =MUST PROVE THAT WHOEVER PUBLISHED IT KNEWW THE INFO WAS WRONG AND/OOR =THAT THEY TRULY DIDNT CARE TO SEARCH DEEPER FOR THE TRUTH AND/OR =IT WAS DONE ON PURPOSE AND NOT ON ACCDEINT c. *THE HISTORY OF THE PUBILC LAW HAS MADE IT EASIER TO SAY STUFF ABOUT PUBLIC OFFICALS THAN PRIVATE CITIZENS* 6. *TO DETERMINE THE THRESHOLD FOR WHAT'S CONSIDERED DEFAMATION, YOU CAN LOOK AT SOME OF THE STANDARD DEFENSES!!!! FOR DEFAMATION!!!!!* -IE: IF UR ACCUSED OF DEFAMATION =AKKKAAA DEFENSESSSSS TO USE IN THE CASE OF SOMEONE BEING ACCUSED OF DEFAMATION!!! a. *ONE DEFENSE FOR DEFAMATION #1: TRUTH IS A DEFENSE!!!!* =NOTICE HOW THIS WAS PREVIOUSLY BROUGHT UP IN HISTORY OF FIRST AMENDMENT =THE STATEMENT HAS TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY TRUE!!! IN ORDER FOR DEFENSE TO APPLY!!! =BUUUUUUUUUUUUT, IF THE MAJORITY OF THE PIECE WAS TRUE AND THERE AREJUST A FEW MISTAKES, THEN THEY WONTTTT BE GUILTY OF DEFAMATION b. *ANOTHER STANDARD DEFENSE!! FOR DEFAMATION #2: PROTECTION OF OPINION!!!!!!!!* -*CONSIDER THE CASE:* CHERRY V DES MOINES LEADER (1901)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! =SO WHEN WE'RE TALKIN ABOUT THE PROTECTION OF OPINION, REALLY WHO'S PROTECTED ARE: -CRITICS!!!!, -REVIEWERS!!!!!!, -OP-ED WRITERS!!!, -EDITORIAL CARTOONISTS =BASICALLY, YOU CAN SAY "IM NOTTTTTT TRYNA REPRESENT THIS AS FACT!!!! IM JUSTTT STATING MY OPINION!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -*REFER TO CLIP SHOWN IN VIDEO THAT DEALS W ONE OF THE IMPORTANT CASESSS ON DEFAMATION IN HISTORY THAT DEALS W CHERRY SISTERS:* the cherry sisters made a play a longgg time ago like pilgrim time or whatever and they made a bunch of bs like making juice from corn lol =CHERRY SISTERS WENT AND TOURED THE COUNTRY =THEN FINALLY, THIS NEWSPAPER PRINTED A REALLY NEGATIVE REVIEW!! OF THE CHERRY SISTERS ACT =THE EDITOR!!!! DESCRIBED THE SISTERS "THREE CREATURES SURPASSING THE WITCHES OF HIDEOUSNESS!. THE MOUTHS OF THEIR RAMPANT FEATURES OPENED LIKE CAVERNS AND SOUNDS LIKE THE WHALINGS OF DAMN SOULS ISSUED THERE FORM!* =^^^SUPER NEGATIVE REVIEW =SO THE CHERRY SSISTERS SUEEEEE THE PAPER THAT PUBLISHED THE NEG REVIEW FOR HELLA MONEY =THEY CLAIMED THE UNFLATTERING DEPICTIONS CONSTITUTED FALSEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 AND MALICIOUS!!!!! LIBEL!!!!1 =GOES TO SUPREME COURT WHICH SAID THE EDITOR OF THE NEWSPAPER HAD THE RIGHTTT!!! TO PUBLISH COMMEBTS!!! HOWEVER SEVERE!! AS THEY PLEASED =COURT SAID BASICALLY, U CAN TALK MATTERS OF PUBLIC OPINION AND UR OPINION IS PROTECTED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! =SUPREME COURT SAID, OPINIONS WONT BE LIBELOUS! =CHERRY CASE IS IMPORTANT BC IT SAYS THE US PROTECTS OPINION c. *ANOTHER STANDARD DEFAMATION DEFENSE #2: THE USE OF HYPERBOLE/EXAGGERATION!!!* -*CONSIDER THE CASE:* HUSTLER V FALWELL (1988) =THE MAGAZINE PUBLISHER LARRY FLENT RUNS THIS FAKE AD IN HIS NUDY MAGAZINE =ITS A PARODY AD! OF JERY FALWELL WHOS A TELEVANGELIST/POLITICAL COMMENTATOR =THE FAKE AD IS AN INTERVIEW!!!! W FALWELL (ofc its fake so he wasnt actually interviewed) =AND CAMPARI RAN A SIMILAR AD AT THE TIME LIKE INTERVIEWING PEOPLE, TALKING ABOUT "OH THEIR FIRST TIME DRINKING CAMPARI" =SO THIS FAKE AD/INTERVIEW IS TALKING TO FALWELL ABOUT "WHAT WAS UR FIRST TIME HAVING SEX" =THE IMPLICATION ISS FALWELL HAD DRUNK SEX WITH HIS MOM IN AN OUTHOUSE LOL =NOTTTT A FLATTERING DEPICTION OF FALSELL SO HE SUUUESSSS!!! HUSTLER!!!!! =GOES TO SUPREME COURT =*THE SUPREME COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF HUSTLER MAGAZINE//LARRY FLENT AND SAID "THIS IS CLEARLLLYYYY NOTTT DEFAMATION!!!!!" -*WHY?:* BC FALWELL IS A PUBLIC FIGURE (already THERES A HIGHER STANDARD BC HES A PUBLIC OFFICIAL), SECONDLY, WHEN U READ IT, NO REASONABLE PERSON COULD CONSIDER THAT TRUE its clealy a parady =THEY DEFENDED HYPERBOLE/OPINION ----------------------------------------- OVERALL PROVING DEFAMATION IS HARD =ITS HARDER IN THE US THAN IN OTHER COUNTRIES =AND ITS ESP DIFICULT TO PROVE IT IF UR A PUBLIC FIGURE bc we dont want the threat of lawsuits to chill the press from reporting on matters of public interest and opinion SO THATS ONE OF THE ABRIDGEMENTS OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH DEFAMATION AND HOW THAT GETS MAPPED OUT IN THE AMERICAN TRADTION

MEDIA REGULATIONS TOPIC SUBSECTION: FAIRNESS DOCTRINE

•*FAIRNESS DOCTRINE* 1. *EVEN THO ITS NO LONGER AN ACTIVE POLICY IN THE US, ITS SORT OF WEIGHS HEAVY IN OUR IMAGINATION!* 2. *THATS IT WAS A UNIQUE RULE WE HAD* a. *GOING ALL THE WAY BACK TO 1927, WE HAD AN EQUAL TIME RULE!!* =SO RADIO AND TV STATIONS HAD TO GIVE EQUAL OPPURTUNITY FOR AIR TIME TO ALL POLITICAL CANDIDATES!!!!! 3. *WE HAVENT HAD ANYTHING LIKE THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE UNTIL 1949!!!!* a. *THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE PASSES IN 1949!! AND WHAT ITS DOING IS ITS TRYING TO ALLOCATE!! TIME AND SPACE ON PUBLIC!! AIR WAVES!!* b. *THE FCC ADOPTED THIS POLICY THAT STATES THAT RADIO!! AND BROADCASTING SHOULDD BE FOR THE PUBLIC!!!! INSTEAD OF JUST FOR A FEW VOICES* =FEW VOICES SUCH AS CORPORATE VOICES (THOSE WHO OWNN RADIO STATIONS) c. *WHAT THE FCC REQUIRED #1#: BROADCASTERS NEEEDED TO BROADCAST PUBLIC ISSUES!!!* d. *IN ORDER TO SECURE THAT LICENSE, THEY HAD TO COMMIT SOME OF THEIR AIR TIME!!!! TO PUBLIC ISSUES!!!!!* =MUST SPEND SOME TIME TALKING ABOUT THINGS THAT WERE IN THE PUBLICS INTEREST =CAN BE POLITICAL OR WHATEVER d. *WHAT THE FCC REQUIRED #2: THEY NEEDED TO HAVE A DIVERSITY OF VIEWS!!* =THEY HAD TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PRESENTATION OF CONTRASTING!!!! POINT SOF VIEWS e. *OVERALL, WHEN ANNOUNCING THEIR NEW REQUIREMENTS, THEY SPECIFICALLY SAID: "BROADCASTERS NEED TO OPERATE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND TO AFFORD REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE DISCUSSION OF CONFLICTING VIEWS ON ISSUES OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE!!!"* 4. *NOW THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE NEVER ACTUALLY SUPPRESSED ANYTHING BUT WHAT IT DID CALL FOR WAS ADDITIONAL BALANCING!!* a. *WASNTTT REALLY NECESSARILY ABOUT OFFERING TIME TO A SINGLE PARTICULAR SPEAKER* b. *IT WAS REALLY ABOUT DIVERSEEE VIEWPOINTS!!* =THESE COULD BE PICKED UP THROUGHOUT THE BROADCASTING WEEK =DIDNT HAVE TO BE ONE BACK TO BACK =REALLY THINING ABOUT OVERTIME, IS THERE THIS OPPORTUNITY FOR DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES OF ISSUES =SO STATIONS WOULD TRACK THE NUMBER OF MINUTES AND SECONDS THEY DEVOTED TO CERTAIN ISSUES =AND THEN THEY COULD GO BACK AND DOCUMENT THAT TO MAKE SURE TAHT THEY HAD MORE OR LESS A BALANCE BETWEEN CONFLICTING VIEWS FOR A MATTER OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 5. *MOST COUNTRY MEDIA SYSTEMS AIM FOR BALANCE!! BUT FEW ACTUALLY LEGISLATE IT THE WAY WE DID IN THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE!!* a. *OFC THE BROADCASTING INDUSTRY CHALLENGED THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE!!* b. *CASE^^ WENT TO THE SUPREME COURT IN 1969!!* c. *THE SUPREME COURT UPHELD THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE* =BUT THEY DID SO IN A VERY PARTICULAR WAY d. *UPHELD THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE ON THE PREMISE OF SCARCITY OF RESOURCEES!!* =BC WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BROADCAST, WE'RE TALKIN ABOUT SENDIN OUT SIGNALS IN THE PUBLIC AIRWAVES =THEERES ONLY SO MUCH BAND WIDTH FOR COMPETING RADIO STATIONS e. *ITS A SCARCE!!! PUBLIC RESOURCE!!* =IF THERE WAS SCARCITY, IT NEEDED TO BE TENDED TO IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST SINCE IT IS THE PUBLIC THAT OWN THE AIRWAVES 6. *BUUT WHEN TECHNOLOGY CHANGED, A LOT OF OTHER THINGS DID AS WELL* a. *THE INVENTION OF CABLE ESPECIALLY WEAKENED THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE!!!* b. *SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NUMEBR OF COMMERICAL TV STATIONS, YOU SEE SCARCITY NOT REALLY AS MUCH OF AN ISSUE ANYMORE!!!* c. *PLUS, CABLE TV ISNT REGULATED THE SAME WAY AS RADIO IS!! BC CABLE DOENSNTTTT USE PUBLIC AIRWAVES!!* =WE CALL IT CABLE BC IT GOES THRU A CABLE! d. *SO THE ISSUE OF SCARCITY ISNT REALLY THERE!!* =THAT REALLY WEAKENS THE STRENGTHH OF THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE 7. *SO, THE FCC BASICALLY KILLLLSS THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE IN 1987!!! MOST OF THE MAJOR ASPECTS OF IT ARE REPEALED IN 1987!!!!* a. *THEN IT FINALLY COMPLETELY DIES IN 2011 !!!!!* =EVERY ASPECT OF IT IS CANCELED b. *WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DATE 1987, YOU NOTICE SOME CHANGES THERE!!!* -*EVERYTHINGS FREE OF REGULATION!!:* THERE WOULDNT HAVE BEEN THE RISE IN CONSERVATIVE RADIO IN THE 80S AND 90S!! REGARDLESS OF UR POLITICAL STANCE, THAT SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGED POLITICAL DISCOURSE IN THE US (THAT RISE OF CONSERVATIVE RADIO) c. *WHEN THINKING OF THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE, WE DONTTT HAVE THIS BALANCE AS MUCH ANYMORE!!!* =THOUGH PLACES LIKE BBC OR PBS STILL DO COMMIT TO BROADCASTING DIVERSE STANCES d. *THOUGH THE PAST YEARS, THERE HAS BEEN A PUSH FOR A RETURN TO FAIRNESS DOCTRINE LIKE MEDIA LANDSCAPE* =BUT NONE OF THEM HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL

FAKE NEWS SUBSECTION TOPIC: FAKE NEWS

•*FAKE NEWS* 1. *DEFINITION OF FAKE NEWS, AS DEFINED BY THE BOOK "MEDIA MANIPULATION AND DISINFORMATION ONLINE": "FAKE NEWS REFERS TO A WIDE!!! RANGE!!! OF DISINFORMATION CIRCULATING ONLINE!!! AND IN THE MEDIA"!!!!!* a. *HARD TO COME UP W A SINGLE DEFINITION* =A LOT OF STUFF/DATA IN SOCIETY RUNS A LOT FO GOOD STUDIES AND WE'LL LOOK AT THEIR DEFINITION* b. *ISSNTTTTT REFERRING TO NEWS U DONTTT LIKE* 2. *ITS A FAIRLYYY NEW AREA OF RESEARCH AND STUDY* a. *DESPITEEE FAKE NEWS BEING AROUND FOR AS LONG AS PRINTING* 3. *KEEEYYYYY ISSUESSS!!! TO THINK THRU!! WHEN THINKING OF FAKE NEWS* a. *KEY ISSUE #1: MISINFORMATION CAN BE MASQUERADED!!! IN A NEWS FORMAT!!!* =SO FAKE NEWS EXISTTSS!! BC IT IMITATES!! THE CONVENTIONS!! OF NEWS!!* =TRIES TO LOOK LIKE A CREDIBLE JOURNLIST STORY =IMPORTANT TO NOTE: NOTTTT ALL FAKE NEWS IS NECESSARILY BAD NEWS* -IE: THINK BACK TO ALL NEWS PARODY SHOWS WE HAVE NOW -IE: SNL!!!!! NO ONE WAS TAKING IT SERIIOUSLY BUT IT TAKES THE FORMAT b. **KEY ISSUE #2: THE DEGREE!!!! OF FALSITY (PARTIALLY TRUE//COMPLETELY FALSE)* -IE" WEBSITES LIKE POLITIFACT.COM WHICH RATESSS HOWWW TRUEEE ARE STATEMENTS/HEADLINES c. *KEY ISSUE #3: THE INTENTION!!! BEHIND!! IT (TO MISLEAD READERS FOR POLITICAL OR ECONOMIC PURPOSES!!* =THATS KINDA ONE OF THE LARRRGEEEEEE CONCERRNSSSS HERE =HOW IS FAKE NEWS BEING GENERATED AND WHATS ITS GOAL -IE: CONSIDER THE STUDY ON SCIENCE.COM, THEY HAVE AN ARTICLE CALLED "THE SPREAD OF TRUE AND FALSE NEWS ONLINE"THEY STATE IN IT "FAKE NEWS AND FALSE RUMORS REACH MOREE POEPLE, PENETRATE DEEPER INTO THE SOCIAL NETOWRK, AND SPREAD MUCH FASTER!!!!!!!!!! THAN ACCURATE STORIES" 4. *CONSIDER THE STUDY ON SCIENCE.COM, THEY HAVE AN ARTICLE CALLED "THE SPREAD OF TRUE AND FALSE NEWS ONLINE"* a. *THEY STATE IN IT "FAKE NEWS AND FALSE RUMORS REACH MOREE POEPLE, PENETRATE DEEPER INTO THE SOCIAL NETOWRK, AND SPREAD MUCH FASTER!!!!!!!!!! THAN ACCURATE STORIES" =STUDY WAS BASED OFF OF TWITTER -IE: A CELEBRITY COULD TWEET AND IT COULD REACH 1 MILLION PEOPLE b. *THISIS THE LARGESTTT STUDY ON FAKE NEWS!!!! AND THATS WHAT THEY HAD TO SAY ABOUT IT* c. *INSTEAD OF LOOKING AT CELEBRITES, THEYW ERE MORE INTERESTED IN PPL W 50 FOLLOWERS!!! AND CAUSE A CHAIN!!* =FAKE NEWS THRU SMALL ACCOUNTS CAN STILLLLL REACHHHH A LARGE AUDIENCE d. *SINCE IT HAS THE NETOWRKING STRUCTURE, THE FAKE INFORMATION LOOKSSS DIFFERENT AND HAS A DIFFERRRNTTT DEPPTTTHHHH TO IT THAN A CELEBRITY* 5. . *WHY IS THAT?: FALSE NEWS IS MOREEEE VIRALLL BC....* a. *REASON #1: ITS MOREEEE NOVEL!!! (AKA ITS NOT THE SAME OLD SAME OLD)* b. *REASON #2:IT EVOKES MORE EMOTION* =IF ITS A BORRINGGG STORY, ITS NOT GONNA SPREAD AS WIDELY 6. *THESE TAKEAWAYS ABOUT FAKE NEWS ALSOOOO RELATESSS TO THE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 ELECTION!!!* a. *CONGRESS RELEASED SOME IMAGES ABOUT THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ON FACEBOOK!* b. *WHEN PEOPLE STARTED STUDYING THEM, WHAT THEY SAID WAS THE POSTS ON FACEBOOK DO THE SAME THING* c. *ALL OF THESE ARENT SUPER TRANSPARENT LIESSS BUUUUUUUUT THEY WERE REALLLLLY ABOUT EVOKING EMOTION!!! AND AN EMOTIONAL REACTION THAT WOULD SOLIDIFY!!! PARTISAN LEANING!!!!* =POSTS WERE DESIGNNNEDDDD TO OUTTTRAGEEE U d. *ONE STUDY: SAID ITS IMPORTANT THAT THESE ALL DONTTT LOOK TOOO POLISHED* =THESE POSTS ARE KINDA DIFFERENT FROM FAKE NEWS IN THE SENSE WHERE ITS NOTTT TRYING TO IMITATE NEWS CONVENTIONS =INSTEAD, TRIES TO LOOK MORE HOMEGROWN =THEY DONT LOOK NOTT AMEIRCAN =IF U TOOK A STEP BACK, ITS KINDA LIEK ANOTHER CULTURE TRYING TO USE POP ART/CULTURE TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND AMERICNAS =FAKE NEWS AND THIS KIDN OF DELIBERATE INSERTAION OF PROVACATIVE POSTS ONTO FACEBOOK ARE ALL INT HE KIND OF SAME MEDIA MANIPULATION SPHERE

PROTECTED AND UNPROTECTED SPEECH TOPIC SUBSECTION: ISEGORIA AND PARREHSIA

•*ISEGORIA AND PARREHSIA BACKGROUND* 1. *ARTICLE ON IT OFFERS A DIFFERENT WAY OF LOOKING AT DEBATES OVER FREEDOM OF SPEECH* -------------------------------------------- •*ISEGORIA AND PARREHSIA* 1. *ISEGORIA!!!! REFERS TO THE EQUAL RIGHT OF CITIZENS TO PARTICIPATE IN PUBLIC DEBATE* a. *TALKS ABOUT THE ASSEMBLY WHERE ALL CITIZENS HAVE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/RIGHT TO BE ABLE TO STAND UP AND ADDRESS THE ASSEMBLY* =OFC NOT EVERYONE DOES THERE WOULD BE TOO MANY/CHAOS/NOT EVERYONE HAS THE TIME (ALL THE REASONS THAT WOULD HOLD TRUE FOR NOW) b. *EVERYONE!!!! HAD THE RIGHT TO SPEAK!!!!! (EVEN THE POOR)* c. *ATHENS MAKES THE EFFORT FOR THE POOR TO ACTIVELY EXERCISE THIS RIGHT* =IN ANCIENT ATHENS, YOUD HAVE PAYING FOR SERVICE!!! AND WE STILL DO THIS TO THIS DAY d. *FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOURE ASKED TO SERVE IN A JURY, THE GOV'T WANTS IT TO BE REPRESENTATIVE!!! OF THE COMMUNITY OF WHERE YOU ARE =THINGS LIKE PAYING FOR JURY SERVICE IS ONE WAY THAT THE GOV'T IS TRYING TO SECURE THIS EQUAL PARTICIPATION e. *GOV'T WANTS ROBUST PARTICIPATION SO THERES EXPECTATIONS AROUND IT* =THATS WHY WE ARENT ALLOWED TO SKIP OUT ON JURY DUTY 2. *PARRHESIA!!! REFERS TO THE LICENSE!!! TO SAY WHAT ONE PLEASED, HOW AND WHEN WHEN PLEASED, AND TO WHOM* a. *AKA THE LICENSE TO SAY WHAT ONE PLEASES ON ANY ISSUE* =SPEAKING TRUTH b. *NOT ONLY SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER BUT SPEAKING TRUTH TO ANYONEEE!!!* c. *CONSIDER THE ANALOGY: SOCRATES CHALLENGES THE POWERFUL DIOGENES!!! CALLING OUT PEOPLE!!* =SOCRATES CHALLENGES ESTABLISHED NORMS/SOCIAL MORES/WHATS ACCEPTABLE -socia mores: are the customs, norms, and behaviors that are acceptable to a society or social group =THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES/RISKS TO TELLING THIS SORT OF TRUTH 3. *WE'VE GOT THESE TWO COMPETING!! NOTIONS IN ANCIENT GREEK THOUGHT!* a. *IF ISEGORIA IS MORE ABOUT EQUALITY!!!....* b. *PARRHESIA IS MORE ABOUT LIBERTY!!!* 4. *THE THING THATS INTERESTING: AUTHOR ARGUES THAT MODERN COLLEGE STUDENTS USE THE HECKLER'S VETO!! BECAUSE THEY SEE A LACK OF ISEGORIA, WHICH IS A LACK OF EQUAL ACCESS TO PUBLIC DEBATE!!! THERE ARE ALSO PERFORMING PARRHESIA, NOT SIMPLY REASON, TO SPEAK THEIR MINDS* a. *THE THING ABOUT BOTH ISEGORIA AND PARRHESIA IS THEY DONTTT DEAL WITH LOGOS* b. *AGAIN, IN GREEK, LOGOS MEANS A LOT OF THINGS!! IT MEANS.....* -SPEECH -THE LOGICAL CAPACITY THAT SPEECH HAS c. *ANOTHER WRITER SPENDS A LOT OF TIME WRITING ABOUT LOGOS =THIS!!!! IS WHAT ALLOWS CIVILIZATION TO FORM* d. *WHEN ARISTOTLE TALKS ABOUT LOGOS, IT IS SEEMINGLY LOGICAL ARGUMENT* =THINGS THAT WORK e. *SO LOGOS IS A RICH TERM* 5. *IN THE BEGINNING OF THE BIBLE, THE WORD WAS "GOD" THE WORD WAS "WITH GOD", THE WORD IS LOGOS* a. *THATS THE LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE THAT WE'RE DESCRIBING TO LOGOS* b. *BUT LOGOS IS THE LOGICAL!! THOUGHT!!* 6. *SO WHAT THE AUTHOR IS ARGUING HERE IS THAT YOU DONTTTT ACTUALLY HAVE LOGOS SHOWING UP HERE IN EITHER ONE OF ISEGORIA OR PARRHESIA!!* a. *YOUVE GOT ISEGORIA WHICH IS EQUAL RIGHTS//WHO SHOWS UP AND YOUVE GOT PARRHESIA WHICH IS THE ABILITY TO SAY ANYTHING!! BUT U DONT HAVE A LOGICAL STANDARD THERE* b. *WHY MATT LIKES THE ARTICLE: AUTHOR TALKS ABOUT THAT REALLYYYY ITS NOT UNTIL WE GET TO THE ENLIGHTENMENT WHERE WE SEE ISEGORIA (EQUAL PARTICIPATION) IS NOTTTTT ABOUT THE PHYSICAL ACT OF EQUAL PARTICIPATION (BC WE'RE EXCHANGING MANUSCRIPTS TO ONE ANOTHER) ITS NOT ABOUT PHYSICALLY MAKING SURE THE POOR SHOW UP AT THIS DELIBERATING BODY BUT ITS MOREEE ABOUTTTT THE EXCHANGE OF REASON* =SO THE IMPORTANT THING THERE THE AUTHOR IS SAYING IS YOU'VE GOT ISEGORIA AND LOGOS FINNALLLYYYY BEING MERGGEDDDD c. *SO THE STANDARD FOR PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC DEBATE IS: IS IT A GOOD ARGUMENT?* =IS IT A LOGICAL ARGUMENT?? d. *AUTHOR SAYS: WELL, THIS CREEPING IN OF LOGOS ISNT NECESSARILY A BAD THING BUUUT IT KINDA EXPLAINS A LOT OF OTHER THINGS* -IE: EFFORTS TO CRIMINALIZE HATE SPEECH =^^SOMEONE COULD SAY "WHY WOULD YOU SAY THAT?" AND U COULD RESPOND "WE CAN CRIMINALIZE HATES SPEECH BC ITS ILLOGICAL!!!! AND THEREFORE ITS UNEQUAL!!! SO, IT VIOLATES THE NOTION OF ISEGORIA 7. *MATT LIKES THE ARTICLE BC IT RAISES THESE ISSUES IN FREE SPEECH AND BRINGS IT UP TO THIS ISSUE OF "WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A SPEAKER IS INVITED TO THE CAMPUS AND THE AUDIENCE THERE USES THE SPEAKS VETO AND SHOUTS DOWN THE PERSON"* A. *A FREE SPEECH ADVOCATE NORMALLY COMES IN AND SAYS "NO DONT DO THAT, GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO SPEAK"* B. *WHAT THE ARTICLE IS SUGGESTING IS THAT YOU MIGHT WANNA LOOK THRU IT WITH A DIFFERENT LENS* =IS IT NOT SIMPLY A MATTER OF LOGOS WHAT THEYRE GOING IS ILLOGICAL =BUT IS IT THEYRE PERFORMING DIFFERENT VALUES THIS ISSUE OF TRYING TO SECURE EQUAL PARTICIPATION FOR THOSE VOICES WHO HAVE NOT BEEN HEARD =THEYRE TRYING TO PERFORM THIS PARRHESIA THATS ABOUT RESPONDINGG!!! AND SPEAKING!!! THATS NOT HELD NECESSARILY TO THE STANDARD OF LOGOS =^NNOT TO SAY ITS ILLOGICAL BUT THATS NOT THE GOVERNNING LIGHTS OF IT 8. *^^SO THOSE ARE JUST SOME ISSUES* a. *AFTER U READ IT, MATT WOULD SUGGEST GOING BACK OVER IT AGAIN AND TRYING TO PUZZLE THRU THOSE TERMS* b. *AGAIN, SINCE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE CATO 2017 SURVEY, HERES A RELEVANT ONE BASED ON OUR CONVERSATION ON THIS READING* -CONSIDER THE SURVEY: HOW SHOULD COLLEGES HANDLE STUDENTS WHO SHUT DOWN CAMPUS SPEAKERS? =THE ANSWERS SHOW A PRETTY STRONG SPLIT AROUND THOSE WHO ALIGN W THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN THE ANSWERS =DEMOCRATC PARTY SUPPORTERS SAY: LISTEN TO THE STUDENTS AND ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS (thats a two to one response almost for democrats vs republicans) =REPUBLICAN PARTY SUPPORTERS SAY: ARREST STUDENTS!! =^^^^PRETTY SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES ON HOW WE RESPOND TO THIS ISSUE OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH c. *BUT THESE TERMS (ISEGORA, PARRHESIA, LOGOS) PROVIDE A DIFFERENT LENS!!! FOR LOOKING THRU FREEDOM OF SPEECH ISSUES THAT ARE INTERESTING AND HELPFUL*

OWNERSHIP AND PUBLIC INTEREST TOPIC SUBSECTION: MEDIA CONCENTRATION AND JOURNALISM

•*MEDIA CONCENTRATION AND JOURNALISM!!!* 1. *RUNNING A NEWSPAPER CAN BE REALLY EXPENSIVE* a. *THEY HAVE TO USUALLY MAINTAIN A LARGE STAFF* AND b. *MEDIA CONCENTRATION HAS MADE LIFE A LITTLE BIT HARDER FOR LOCAL JOURNALISM!!* 2. *BEST WAY TO THINK OF HOW MEDIA CONCENTRATION HAS MADE JOURNALISM EXPENSIVE: MEDIA CONSOLIDATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!* a. *MEDIA CONSOLIDATION + COLLAPSE OF PAYMENT MODEL = PROBLEMS IN JOURNALISM!!!!!* b. *THINGS THAT HAVE LEAD TO ALL SORTS OF PROBLEMS IN JOURNALISM:* -MEDIA CONSOLIDATION VERTICALLY!! AND HORIZONTALLY!! -CONCENTRATION ON OWNERSHIP -PLUSS THE COLLAPSE ON TRADITIONAL JOURNALISM'S PAYMENT MODEL c. *SO WE'VE ALREADYY TALKED ABOUT MEDIA CONSOLIDATION, NOW WE'LL TALK ABOUT PAYMENT MODELS!!!* 3. *PAYMENT MODELS* a. *PAYMENT MODELS REFER TO CONSUMER!! AND/OR ADVERTISING!!!* b. *SO MOSTT MEDIA COMPANIES DEPEND ON MONEY FROM ONE OF TWO SOURCES ORRR BOTHH SOURCES* =THOSE SOURCES ARE CONSUMERSSSS!! AND/OR ADVERTISING c. *TO UNDERSTAND THE CONSUMER SIDE: USE BOOKS!! AS AN EXAMPLE/ANALOGY* =ALMOST ALL THE MONEY IN TRADITIONAL BOOK PUBLISHING COMES FROM CONSUMERS BUYING THE BOOKS THEMSELVES =IF YOU BOUGHT A COPY OF ALICE IN WONDERLAND, THEYRE ARENTTTT A LOT OF ADS IN IT =YOU PAID FOR THE BOOK AND U OWN IT =SO YOU CAN DO WITH IT AS YOU WILL =ALL THE MONEY WAS MADE AT THE POINT OF SALE d. *TO UNDERSTAND THE ADVERTISING SIDE: USE BROADCAST TELEVISION AS AN EXAMPLE/ANALOGY* =ANYONE WITH A TV SET THAT CAN PICK UP THE SIGNALS CAN SIT THERE AND WATCH THE TV PROGRAMMING =U DONT HAVE TO PAY SUBSCRIPTION =BUUUT IF U GOT A TV SET THAT CAN PICK UP THE WAVES OF THE BROADCAST THEN U CAN WATCH THAT TV PROGRAM =SO IN THAT CASE, U THINK OF THE BIG BROADCASTERS (NBC/ABC/CBS/FOX), ALLLLLLLLLLLL THE MONEY WILL BE COMING FROM ADVERTISERS =ADVERTISERS PAID FOR THAT TIME ON THE AIR 4. *NOW, TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE HAS REALLY MIXED!!! THESE TWO MODELS TOGETHER A LOT (the consumers and advertising)* a. *CONSIDER THE EXAMPLE OF HULU!!!* =U R BOTH PAYING A SUBSCRIPTION FEE ANNDD DEPENDING ON HOW MUCH U PAY, YOURE ALSO WATCHING A FEWW ADS =SO THERE IS THIS MIXTURE OF DO U WANNA PAY LESS AND WATCH SOME ADVERTISING OR PAY MORE W NO ADS 5. *WITH THAT, ITS REALLY BEEN HARD FOR JOURNALISM!!! BC THIS NOTION OF ADVERTISING OR POINT OF PURCHASE HAS BOTTOMED OUT!! FOR THEM* a. *ITS CREATED A NUMBER OF PROBLEMS* b. *ONE OF THE PROBLEMS HAS BEEN: THE LOSS OF ACTUAL NEWSPAPERS IN A LOCAL MEDIA MARKET!!!!* 6. *CONSIDER THIS STORY THAT EXPLAINS SOME OF THE RESEARCH DONE ON THE BENEFIT OF LOCAL PAPERS AND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A COMMUNITY LOSES SOME LOCAL MEDIA OUTLETS* =STORY IS OF A SMALL NEWSPAPER THATS SHUTTING DOWN AND THEYRE WORRIED a. *WHY ITS MORE EXPENSIVE WITH THE DECREASE OF SMALL NEWSPAPERS* =IN A PERIOD, ABOUT 300 NEWSPAPERS CLOSED ACROSS THE COUNTRY =BY LOOKING AT THE THE BORROWING POWER OF CITIES AND TOWNS WITH THRIVING NEWSPAPERS, THEY FOUND THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANTTT DIFFERENCE W TOWNS THAT HADDDD LOCAL NEWSPAPERS AND TOWNS THAT LOSSTT EMM =WHEN NEWSPAPERS CLOSE, THE COST TO BORROW MONEY (FOR PROJECTS SUCH AS SCHOOLS AND ROADS AND HOSPITALS WENT UP!!!!) =THE BORROWING COST INCREASES BY 0.1%!!! =THAT MAY SEEN V LITTLE BIT ITS ACTUALLY A LOT =IT ADDS UP W LOANS =FOR EXAMPLE, AN AVERAGE LOAN WILL BE 65 MILLION DOLLARS!! WITH A 0.1% INCREASE IN A LOAN THAT SIZE, TAX PAYERS HAVE TO PAY AN EXTRA $65,000 IN INTEREST!! =IN ADDITION, CITIES AND TOWNS USUALLY HAVE ONE OR MORE PROJECTS IN THE WORK!!! THAT 65MIL IS JUST FOR ONE PROJ =BOTTOM LINE, THAT LITTLE INCREASE OF 0.1% CAN COST TAXPAYERS MILLIONS!! -*WHY ARE LENDERS TAXING MORE ON TOWNS THAT DONT HAVE NEWSPAPERS:* IF A NEWSPAPER CLOSES, THEYRE NNNOOOOO LONGER PERFORMING A CRUCIAL!!!!!!!!!1 WATCHDOG!!!! ROLE!!!!!!!!!! IN ORDER TO KEEP LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN CHEECK!!!!! =LOCAL GOVERNMENTS NOT KEPT IN CHECK ARE MORE LIKELY TO ENGAGE IN MORE BAD BEHAVIOR AND BE MORE INEFFICIENT =^^^THAT MAKES IT RISKIER TO LEND MORE MONEY TO TOWNS =MAKES LENDERS MORE NERVOUS ABOUT LENDING MONEY TO INEFFICIENT GOVERNMENTS =THEYRE ASKING FOR A HIGHER INTEREST AMOUNT TO COMPENSATE FOR THAT RISK =theres an irony here: ppl who cancel their local newsapapers to save money end up spending MUCH more in tax money b. *A LOT OF WHAT THAT STORY'S SAYING IS: LOCAL JOURNALISM HAS AN IMPACT!!!!! AND IT DOES THINGS THAT IF MEDIA COMPANIES ARE INTEGRATING VERTICALLY AND HORIZONTALLY, LOCAL NEWSROOMS MIGHT GET SHUT DOWN BC THEYRE EXPENSIVE!!* =THOSE DEEP LOCAL STORES DOOO END UP COSTING A LOT OF MONEY c. *THE STORY OF MODERN JOURNALISM IN THE PAST 10 YEARS HAVE BEEN ONE OF SUFFERING FINANCIAL FAILURES AS A RESULT OF MEDIA CONSOLIDATION AND THE PAYMENT MODEL ABSOLUTELY BOTTOMING OUT* d. *OTHER ASPECTS OF THE STORY THAT ARE RELEVANT TO THIS DISUSSION:* =THERE HAVE BEEN LOTS OF NEWSPAPER CLOSURES OVER TIME and its NOT like any new ones are opening up -IE: THE SEATTLE PI CLOSED YEARS AGO ITS NO LONGER A DAILY NEWSPAPER THAT RUNS IN COMPETITION W THE SEATTLE TIMES = ------------------------------------------- OVERALL THE STORY OF NEWSPAPER AND JOURNALISM STRUGGLES IT CAN REALLY BE UNDERSTOOD IN A LOT OF WAYS BUT ONE OF THE CHIEF LENSES IS ECONOMIC MODEL FOR JOURNALISM HAS RUN INTO TREMENDOUS PROBELMS AND ITS RUN INTO PROBLEMS IN LARGE MEASURES BC OF THESE ISSUES OF MEDIA CONCENTRATION AND HOW MODERN MEDIA OCCUPIES SPACE AND HOW PPL PAY FOR IT AND SO U SEEN ALL SORTS OF PAPERS TRYINGGGG TO FIGURE OUT SOMETHING THATLL WORK A LOT HAVE GONE TO SUBSCRIPTIONS THE NY TIMES HAVE GONE THRU A PAYMENT WALL AGAIN, ITS NOW MORE OF A SHIFT TO INITIALLY ONLINE IT WAS ADVERTISING BUT ADVERTISING WENT AWAY U CAN THINK BACK TO EARLY CRAIGSLIST WHICH HAD A HUGE IMPACT ON ADVERTSIING FOR NEWSPAPERS THOSE SORTS OF ADS FOR "BUY THIS FROM ME" OR "LOCAL JOB ADS" WERE A BIGGGGG DEALLL FOR NEWSPAPERS BUT THAT GOES AWAY =SO THEYRE ALL STILL STRUGGLINGNOW TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS GONNABE A STABLE FOUNDATION ECONOMICALLY TO ALLOW FOR THE TYPE OF JOURNALISN IM=N COMMUNITIES THAT THEY NEED AND ACTAULLY ENDS UP BEING TO THEI ADVANTAGE ANYWAYS

OVERVIEW OF POLITICAL COMMUNICATION

•*OVERVIEW OF POLITICAL COMMUNICATION* (LOOKING AT THE OVERVIEW AND KEY IDEAS OF IT) 1. *WHAT WE MEAN BY THE STUDY OF IT* a. *COMMUNICATION IN!!! AND ABOUTTT!! POLITICS* b. *ONE RESEARCHER DEFINED COMMUNICATION AS "PURE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE ALLOCATION OF PUBLIC RESOURCES, OFFICIAL AUTHORITY, AND OFFICIAL SANCTIONS"*** =^^AKA POLITICAL COM LOOKS AT REVENUE (aka how we're spending money), WHOS GETTING AUTHORITY TO MAKE LEGAL LEGISLATION, EXECUTIVE DECISIONS, AND SANCTIONS!!! (aka what the state is rewarding/punishing ^^^A VERY DISCLOSE FOCUSED DEFINITION c. *IT CAN ALSO INCLUDE OTHER!!! POLITICAL CONVERSATION TOPICS SUCH AS...* -BOYCOTTS -PUBLIC PROTESTS -WEARING A FLAG PIN =OBVIOUSLY POLITICS AND IDENTITY ARE MERGED AND A LOT GETS FOLDED 2. *GENERALLY, WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT COMMUNICATION THAT LOOKS AT SOME!!! LEVEL OF....* -PUBLIC AUTHORITY!!!!!!!!!!!! OR -PUBLIC RESOURCES!!!!!!!!!!! a. *AKA WHO FIGURES OUT WHAT LAWS ARE PASSED, WHAT FUNDING OUR ENFORCEMENT PRIORITIES ARE FOR STATE* =AKA WHO ARE WE LOOKING AT OR WHO ARE WE TALKING ABOUT POLITICAL COMMUNICATION//COMMUNICATORS b. *TYPICALLY WE'LL LOOK AT POLITICAL ACTORS (LIKE POLITICIANS), CITIZENS, AND THE MEDIA* 3. *REFER TO DIAGRAM!!!! @ 1:55 IN THIS VIDEO* =AUTHORS DRAWING A CHART OF THE 3!!! DIFFERENT ELEMENTS!!!!!! OF POLITICAL COMMUNICATION: POLTIICAL ORGANIZATIONS, CITIZENS, AND MEDIA a. *ONE ELEMENT: POLITICAL ORGANIZATIONS!!!!!!* =ONE BUBBLE WITH ARROWS POINTING IN BOTH DIRECTIONS WITH MEDIA BUBBLE and doesnt connect w the citizens bubble =INCLUDES.... -PARTIES -PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS -PRESSURE GROUPS -TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS (aka ppl trying to influence political com) -GOVERNMENTS b. *ANOTHER ELEMENT: CITIZENS* =ONE BUBBLE W ARROWS POINTING IN BOTH DIRECTIONS W MEDIA BUBBLE and doesnt connect w the political organizations bubble =WHO ARE EITHER GONNA GET INVOLVED IN TERMS OF HOW THEY SPEAK BACK TO GOV'T or WHETHER THEYRE GONNA PROTEST or HOW THEYRE CONSUMING c. *ANOTHER ELEMENT: MEDIA!!1* =ONE BUBBLE WITH ARROWS POINTING TO BOTHHH POLITICAL ORGANIZATIONS!! AND MEDIA!!! =PLAYS AN IMPORTANT PART IN ALL OF THIS =LOOKING AT WHEN POLITICIANS COMMUNICATE PUBLICLY, WHEN CITIZENS TALK TO ONE ANOTHER ABOUT POLITICAL ISSUES/DEMONSTRATIONS =A LOT OF WHAT WE'RE GONNA SEE IS THAT CITIZENS ARE CONSUMERS!! OF POLITICS as its presented in the mass media 4. *ALL OF THE ELEMENTS ABOVE CONTRIBUTE!!! TO A POLITICAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM* a. *A POLITICAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM REFERS TO WHERE POLITICIANS!! AND JOURNALISTS ACT TO PRODUCE!!! POLITICAL NEWS!!!! FORRRR AN AUDIENCE* b. *THIS IS FURTHER SHAPED BY POLITICAL COMMUNICATION CULLLTUREEEE!!!* c. *POLITICAL COMMUNICATION CULTURE IS SHAPED BY...* -STRUCTURE OF MEDIA MARKETS -PROFESSIONALIZATION OF JOURNALISM -ROLE OF THE STATE IN THE PRODUCTION OF MEDIA 5. *POLITICAL COMMUNICATION!!! VS POLITICAL SCIENCE!!* a. *POLITICAL COMMUNICATION RESEARCH IN THIS WAY IS FOCUSING ON POLITICAL COM TAKIN PLACE IN PUBLIC!!* =AKA LOOKS AT HOW THINGS TAKE PLACE PUBLICLY AND HOWWW WE ENGAGE IN COMMUNICATION AROUND IT b. *WHEREAS POLITICAL SCIENCE..* =MAYBEE THISIS MORE INTERESTED INTHE DECISION MAKING PROCESS!! INSIDE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS =THERES NO HARD/FAST DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN THE TWO (theres some faculty members in both!!) ----------------------------------------- •*POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE!! IN POLITICAL COMMUNICATION* 1. *POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE!!! TRIES TO GAUGE WHAT CITIZENS NEED!!!! TO KNOW/BE ABLE TO DO IN ORDER TO VOTE AND/OR AFFECT THE GOV'T!!!!* =AKA SORT OF A BASELINE LEVEL a. *IS ONE BIG ISSUE!!!!! THAT NEWS ORGANIZATIONS//POLITICAL COMMUNICATION SCHOLARS ARE INTERESTED WITH IS THE NOTION OF POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE!!!!* b. *THINGS THAT COUNT!!! AS POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE!!!!!!!!!!!* -CAN BE INFORMATION THAT VARIES FROM ERA TO ERA!!! OR -CAN BE HOW AWARE!!!! YOU ARE OF INFORMATION (for example, how much you know about legislature so you can vote on it well. IN OPPOSITION, you can be misinformed which makes you vote poorly) OR -THE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION CITIZENS REMEMBER!! ABOUT POLITICAL FIGURES!!!1 ORR INSTITUTIONS (for example, info thats useful in voting. what we see is DEPE 2. *THE MEDIA!!!!!! IS ONE OF THE MOST CONSISTENT INFLUENCES!! ON POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE!!!* a. *IS A LOT OF BASIC NEWS KNOWLEDGE* =IF ITS ABOUT BASIC FACTS AND FIGURES ABOUT POLICIIES/POLITICIANS, ITS GONNA BE COMING FROM THE MEDIA b. *MEDIA INFLUENCES IS ONE OF THE STRONGEST CONSUMPTIONS ON THE LEVEL OF POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE* 3. *CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING STUDIES!!!* a. *STUDY #1: PEW WILL OFTEN RUN A POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE/NEWS QUIZ!!!* =LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENCES IN BASELINE LEVEL OF CIVIC KNOWLEDGE (USEFUL TO LOOK AT) -IE: ASKS ABOUT KEYSTONE PIPELINE/MARTIN LUTHER KING/HOW MANY WOMEN ARE ON THE SUPREME COURT =MOREEE MEDIA USE IS GONNA RESULT IN MORE KNOWLEDGE = 4. *EDUCATION LEVEL!!1 ALSOOO INFLUENCES POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE* a. *PEOPLE WITH HIGHER EDUCATION ARE MORE KNOWLEDGABLE* =THERES OBVIOUS VARIATION BASED ON IT B. *THERES ALSO PARTISAN DIFFERENCES* 5. *WHYYYY IS POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE IMPORTANT???* a. *REASON #1: LOWWW POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE!! AND LOWWWWW!!! INTEREST ARE THE MOST SERIOUS!!! DETRIMENTS TO CITIZEN PARTICIPATION!!* =IF U HAVE LOW INTEREST IN POLITICS UR PROBABLY NOTTTTT GONNA TUNE INTO A LOT OF NEWS COVERAGE =AND IF YOURE NOT GONNA WANNA TURN TO NEWS COVERAGE THEN YOURE GONNA HAVE LOW POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE (bc media educates u on political knowledge) =HAS SERIOUS DETRIMENTS TO CITIZEN PARTICIPATION THRU VOTING!!!! (ppl arent gonna vote) LOW INTEREST = LOW POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE = LOW CITIZEN PARTICIPATION (AKA VOTING) =BAD THING BC YOU WANT TO HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE!!! -------------------------------------- OVERALL IN POLITICAL COM WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT HOW POLITICAL ACTORS!! AND CITIZENS ENGAGE!!! IN COM MEDIA ITS A CENTRAL FOCUS

OWNERSHIP AND PUBLIC INTEREST TOPIC SUBSECTION: PUBLIC INTEREST

•*WHAT COUNTS!!! AS PUBLIC INTEREST* 1. *THE FCC REGULATES BROADCASTING TO AVOID INTERFERENCE!!!!! BUUUT, THIS ALSO MIGHT REDUCE!!! THE DIVERSITY OF THE OPINION* a* REGULATIONS ON RADIO BROADCASTING STARTED BEFORE COMMERCIAL RADIO BROADCAST* b. *SO SOME OF THE FIRST REGULATIONS WE HAD ON RADIO BROADCASTING ARE IN 1912!!! BC OF SHIPPING!! ON THE WATER!!* =THATS BC WE HAD COMMERCIAL MARITIME RADIO TRAFFIC USING SOME OF THE SAME FREQUENCIES AS THE NAVY!!! =WE COULDNTTT HAVE THAT^^^ =INTERFERING W NAVY FREQUENCIES IS DANGEROUS!!! c. *SO THERE HAS TO BE THIS KIND OF REGULATION OF THAT TYPE OF SCARCE PUBLIC SYSTEM!!!* d. *SO RADIO HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN INTERESTING TEST CASE BC WE'RE DEALING WITH SIGNALS!! IN THE AIR!!!* 2. *THE FCC HAS ALWAYS BEEN CONCERNED WITH THAT^^^^^* a. **MAJOR RADIO BROADCASTERS FOUGHT PIRATE RADIO STATIONS OVER THIS!!* b. *FOR EXAMPLE, THE FCC HAS CRACKED DOWN HARD!!! IN MANY CASES ON WHAT WE WOULD CALL MICRO!!! BROADCASTING!! OR PIRATE RADIO STATIONS!!!* -IE: 15 YEARS AGO, A SWAT-LIKE LOOKING TEAM STORMED!! INTO THIS GUYS HOUSE, THREW HIM ONTO THE GROUND, AND GATHERED ALL OF HIS EXPENSIVE POSSESSIONS AND TOOK EM c. *THAT SWAT-LIKE LOOKING TEAM WAS THE FCC!!!!* =THE GUYS HOUSE THEY RAIDED WAS IN FLORIDA AND HE RAN A PIRATED RADIO STATION THAT PLAYED BIKER ROCK d. *RAIDED IT BC HE DIDNT HAVE A LICENSE!!!* =THEY WENT IN AND CONFISCATED ALL OF IT 3. *MICRO BROADCASTERS SAY THE FCC DOING THESE RAIDS TO PROTECT AGAINST RADIO INTERFERENCES ARE UNNECESSARY!! BC THEY SAY THEIR SIGNAL ISNTTTT REALLY INTERFERING!! WITH LARGE RADIO STATIONS* a. *STATES THAT THEIR SIGNALS (MICRO BROADCASTERS AND PIRATE BROADCASTERS) HAVE SIGNALS THAT ARE TOOOOOO WEAKKK!!* =DOESNT IMPACT IT b. *BBUUT A LOT OF RADIO BROADCASTING GROUPS FOUGHT HARDDD FOR STRICTTT RESTRICTIONS!! ON MICROBROADCASTERS!!!* =ONE OF THEM BEING NPR 4. *THE FCC DID A STUDY OF THIS AND REALIZED MANY OF THESE MICRO BROADCASTERS DONTTTTT ACTUALLY CAUSE A PROBLEM!!!!* a. *REALIZED THEY SHOULDNT HAVE SUCH STRICT REGULATIONS ON THEM* b. *IN 2013 THEY STARTED LOOSENING IT UP BUT ITS STILLLL PRETTY TOUGH TO GET A LOCAL, MICRO RADIO BROADCAST LICENSE!!* c. *CONSIDER UW'S RAINY DAWG RADIO!!!!!!!*! -*WHY RAINYDAWG MIGHT NOTTT BE CONSIDERED AN INTERFERENCE TO MICROBROADCASTING:* THERE ARE NOO RADIO WAVES!! =^^ITS STREAMING d. *LOTS OF MICRO BROADCASTERS STREAMMMM THEIR RADIO ONLINE NOW!!!!!!! OR THRU TV!!!* =RATHER THAN ACTAULLY THRU THE RADIO =FROM A USERS STANDARD, THEY INTERACT THRU IT LIKE RADIO =BUT FROM A REGULATORY STANDARD, THEYRE WORDS APART!! ONES IN THE AIR, ONES IN A WIRE e. *THESE REGULATIONS GET TRICKY WHEN WE CANT KEEP UP W TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION*