The Handbook of Journalism Studies

284 YOUM
constitutional law on press freedom. Among the wide range of media law issues that the Court
has ruled on since 1969 are prior restraint, the journalist’s privilege, “burning the source” (i.e.,
breaking the confi dentiality agreement with news sources voluntarily), the fairness doctrine, the
right of reply, advertising, copyright, freedom of the student press, freedom of information, obscenity,
indecent broadcasting, cable regulation, and Internet communication.
One of the most signifi cant recent developments in US media law relates to commercial
speech. The commercial speech exception to the First Amendment that the US Supreme Court
accepted in the early 1940s was rejected in the mid-1970s. Most important, the turnabout for the
Supreme Court in its commercial speech doctrine was based on the consumer’s right to the “free
fl ow of information,” although the information was purely commercial advertising (Virginia State
Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748, 1976).
Access to information as the right to know is widely recognized as an affi rmative concept
of freedom of speech and the press (Mendel, 2008). In the United States, however, only a limited
number of journalists regularly use freedom of information (FOI) laws for their work. The
mismatch between the lofty theory behind FOI laws and their actual use in the United States
clamors for systematic research as a case study. In addition, the gap between theory and practice
for journalism in FOI laws deserves a comparative examination. Further, scant attention has been
paid to foreigners’ extensive use of the federal FOI Act of the United States. Hence, it offers opportunities
for research, whether quantitative or qualitative.
In contrast with freedom of information, which nearly seventy countries recognize as a right
(freedominfo.org, 2007), “sunshine laws” regarding government meetings are few and far between.
The United States seems to be a minority of one in its experience with open meetings laws
since 1976. The enduring inertia among journalists, lawyers, and lawmakers on the public’s right
to attend government agency meetings is the rule, not the exception. Journalism law students and
scholars might seek to explain the lack of attention to sunshine laws around the world.
The globalizing media have resulted in an array of challenges for journalism law. Academics
and media lawyers are becoming more keenly aware of those challenges. As law professor David
Kohler (2006, p. vii), the supervising editor of the Journal of International Media and Entertainment
Law, noted:
The media and entertainment businesses have become truly global. Companies that used to look
to the United States for most of their revenue now look abroad for much of their growth. Lawyers
representing media and entertainment companies now must confront not only the U.S. legal
system, but also those of a host of other jurisdictions where their clients’ products are distributed.
Even products intended primarily for domestic consumption may fi nd their way abroad through
new technologies that facilitate seamless distribution across geographic borders.
Thus far, the US Supreme Court has yet to confront media law directly involving choice of
law, jurisdiction, and enforcement of foreign court judgments. Several lower courts have adjudicated
the First Amendment rights of the American media when they are sued abroad for defamation
and other reasons. These still novel media law issues are likely to arise frequently in the
Internet era, which compels journalism scholars and practitioners to better understand “the basic
moral engine that drives each nation’s media laws” (Glasser, 2006, p. xvi).
Up to now, research on international and comparative media law has been sporadic and less
substantial. And media law has yet to emerge as a major scholarly topic for international and
comparative law (see Reimann & Zimmermann, 2006). In recent years, however, it has gained
traction with legal scholars and practitioners. The leading UK media law scholar, Eric Barendt,
and others have examined freedom of speech and the press in international and comparative law.