The First Amendment and the Media in the Court of Public Opinion
- PDF / 87,926 Bytes
- 5 Pages / 442 x 663 pts Page_size
- 36 Downloads / 179 Views
Book Review The First Amendment and the Media in the Court of Public Opinion David A. Yalof and Kenneth Dautrich Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002, 155 pp. paperback, ISBN: 0 521 01181 7, hardback, ISBN: 0 521 80466 3 Acta Politica (2004) 39, 109–113. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500052
Based on surveys conducted in 1997 and 1999, two University of Connecticut political scientists express guarded optimism that the American public is sufficiently knowledgeable and supportive of free press guarantees — ‘citizens are not fools’ (p. 110). The authors focus on public support for freedom of the press after widespread criticism of sensational coverage in the O.J. Simpson trial, President Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky, and Princess Diana’s death. Following great acclaim for investigative journalists who exposed government misconduct during the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal, ‘confidence in the modern-day news media has fallen to an all-time low’ (p. 112). Based on David Easton’s systems theory, they predict that decline in specific support for particular actors did not undermine generalized, diffuse trust and confidence in freedom of the press. Testing V.O. Key’s assessment that ‘voters are not fools’, Yalof and Dautrich find solid public support for the First Amendment, both abstract and concrete. Each telephone survey polled 1,000 randomly selected, non-institutionalized, adult respondents. The annotated appendix includes over 80 opinion items probing support for speech, press, and religious liberties. The 1999 questionnaire included six questions testing knowledge of prevailing law. When asked at the outset to identify the most important Constitutional rights, only 6% mentioned a free press, fourth in frequency after free speech (50%), religion (13%), and the right to bear arms (14%). When subsequently asked specifically about a free press, over 90% acknowledged its importance. Between 1997 and 1999 those responding that the press had too much freedom increased from 38 to 53%, but 66% still agreed that news organizations should be allowed to publish what they think is appropriate (Table 4.4, p. 72). The authors conclude that a rational public demonstrates sophistication comparable to the reasoning of Supreme Court opinions differentiating between the print and broadcast media. Support for sexually explicit material in magazines and video rentals is high, but a majority opposes dissemination by more readily accessible and potentially invasive media such as the radio and television. The authors find comparable levels of support for mainstream papers such as The N.Y. Times and tabloids such as The National Enquirer; for ABC News
Book Review
110
and the Jerry Springer Show; and for Newsweek and Hustler magazines. The reported demographic differences offer few surprises – Men are more likely than women to defend rights to publish sexually explicit material; education and knowledge correlate with greater support for press freedoms, as do a liberal ideology and high income. In conclusion, Yalof and Daut
Data Loading...