Dillan Teabout

JOMC 393.03A
Midterm
October 6, 2020

In the age of information, we all rely on receiving information concerning things that can

affect us. In America, we pride ourselves on our freedom compared to other countries. Here, we

say that you have the freedom to practice your religion and speak out against unfair treatment by

the government. American's need information to make the best decision about electing

government officials. They also need information about the elected officials to hold them

accountable for their word. This is the American way, something you can get here that isn't like

any other place. A journalist in America counts on the First Amendment to protect their right to

spread this information. The First Amendment of the Constitution guarantees freedom of the

press. Court and legislative bodies can not infringe upon the freedom of the press. Freedom of

the press allows the American people to know the truth about the country. It allows us to see the

flaws here and ugly truth when needed. Acts such as the Freedom of Information Act and

Privacy Act help protect this America right given to the press. Freedom of mass communication

is an important check of democracy because the people govern, but they have to be aware of

what is happening.

When the First Amendment was first ratified, it only applied to the federal government.

Therefore, states did not have to follow the freedom of press or speech. State governments would

censor newspapers. The freedom of the press and freedom of speech was integrated with Gitlow

v. New York, 269 U.S. 652 (1925), stating "the First Amendment protects freedom of speech and

the press from abridgment by Congress are among the fundamental personal rights and

"liberties" protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment
Dillan Teabout
JOMC 393.03A
Midterm
October 6, 2020

by the States." With this emplace, the federal government or states could stop journalists from

spreading information to the American people. However, this does not mean attempts were not

tried to keep the press from releasing information.

Near v. Minnesota was a Supreme Court case in 1931. This case is a significant

landmark for freedom of the press. Even though the Gitlow v. New York, 269 U.S. 652 in 1925

said, the states are supposed to give the press rights. This was not enforced everywhere until this

case. Minnesota had a law stating the newspapers had to be approved before they could be

published. A journalist had to show "good motives and justifiable ends" for the print to be

published. If they failed this, the paper was mostly likely censored in advance. It was also a

crime to publish "obscene, lewd, and lascivious" or "malicious, scandalous and defamatory"

information.

However, Jay Near published a "scandal sheet" in the 1920s in Minneapolis. The paper's

sole purpose was to provide sensational news and "exposé" reports on corruption in the area.

Near criticized elected officials and blamed them for dishonesty regularly on the paper. Near said

that Jews were ruling the city, the police chief took bribes, and the governor was not eligible for

his position. In 1925, his newspaper's publication was stopped due to the Minnesota law known

as the "gag law."

This law was taken to court by Near. The argument stated that the "gag law" violated the

Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Near, stating that the "gag law"
Dillan Teabout
JOMC 393.03A
Midterm
October 6, 2020

directly violated the First Amendment in the United States Constitution. This is one of the most

critical freedom of press cases. This case provided more protection to public morals and the

welfare of the community. Without this ruling, state governments could have censored

newspapers for a long time, especially since the great depression was around the corner. Corrupt

politics could have shaped the narrative to favor whichever idea they believed in. This ruling

would later show up in other court cases to prove that the press's freedom was violated.

In 1964, Sullivan was a police commissioner and saw an ad in the New York Times

paper that exposed the police force of various misbehavior related to the civil rights movement.

Most of the statements in the ad were true, but some of the statements were false. Sullivan

claimed he was libeled in an ad. He sued the New York Times and got a massive verdict in his

favor in an Alabama court. After losing, the New York Times took the case to the United States

Supreme Court, implying the ad was not meant to hurt Sullivan's reputation and was protected by

the First Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the newspaper. The court stated the

right to publish all statements are protected under the First Amendment. The court said that the

plaintiff must show evidence that the defendant knew the statement was false or reckless.

This case became known as the New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. This case is critical

because it gave people the freedom to discuss and criticize government officials. This helped

newspaper publishers because they did not have to fear being sued. This would then make

publishers take down their papers in fear of being bankrupted. The Supreme Court decided to

give considerable immunity to those who discuss public officials. If this never happened, this
Dillan Teabout
JOMC 393.03A
Midterm
October 6, 2020

could have caused a decrease in newspapers discussing politicians even if the information was

accurate because they could be sued for libel.

New York Times Co. v. the United States is often referred to as the "Pentagon Papers"

case. In 1967, the Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara commissioned a secret government

study on American involvement in the Vietnam war. This project had 47 volumes containing

more than 7,000 pages that were completed in 1968. In 1971 Daniel Ellsberg, a military analyst

who worked on the project, secretly made copies of the documents and gave them to reporters

for the New York Times. The research showed that the government openly lied about the United

States' involvement in Vietnam. They covered up illegal bombings and chemical warfare. This

also showed that the United States was covering 80% of France's military expenses. President

Nixon obtained a court injunction and stopped the newspaper from printing.

He argued that published these papers would "limit the president's ability to guard

national security. The New York Times stopped printing articles and tried to appeal. However,

the Washington Post published articles about the pentagon papers. Unlike the Judge in New

York, the Washington judge refused injunction; therefore, the Post continued to publish. Due to

the different decisions made, the case went to the Supreme Court. The court decided they side

with the New York Times and Washington Post. Saying that the press releasing the papers did

not put the nation's security at risk and prior restraint was not justified. Justice Hugo Black stated

the press was to serve the governed, not the governors, and the First Amendment gave the free

press protection to fulfill their role in America's democracy. This case supported the idea that if
Dillan Teabout
JOMC 393.03A
Midterm
October 6, 2020

the press publishes something that makes the government looks bad does not mean the

government can stop it. This case is excellent because it allows the press to speak freely about

government corruption honestly.

Even if the United States is considered free the press, does it rank compared to other

countries around the world? Out of the 180 countries, the United States of America ranks 45th.

This is due to arrests, physical assaults, public denigration, and journalists' harassment in 2019.

Under President Trump, the White House replaced traditional forms of press access. They have

made attempts to deny specific journalists and news outlets access to other opportunities for

press engagement. Norway is 1st in the rankings. Norway has been at the top for years. Most of

Norway's press is owned privately and self-regulated. North Korea is ranked 180th. This is not

surprising being that the country is under a dictatorship. Their government controls the media

and only shows what they allow. They have full control over the information available to the

foreign media. North Koreans can still be sent to concentration camps for interacting with

content provided by a media outlet based outside the country.

In conclusion, the United States America is not ranked number one. However, the press

has plenty of rights. The cases listed above show how far the press's freedom has come and will

continue to go. This is a fantastic thing considering how strict other countries are about the press.

Today, with all of the controversial things happening in America concerning the Trump

Administration. If these cases did not happen before today, there is no telling how free the press

would be. Social media could even be regulated to subdue peoples' opinions. One thing all of the
Dillan Teabout
JOMC 393.03A
Midterm
October 6, 2020

cases share is the expansion of the First Amendment. Each of them showed how much the First

Amendment protected the freedom of the press. Thanks to this, journalists today can speak freely

without fearing government or state intervention and being sued for telling the truth about a

government official.