Last Updated: May 26, 1999
Printer-friendly version
Book review
Page-turners they’re not; they are great references
These media law books examine cases of interest to
all journalists — prior restraint, subpoenas, privacy and access — but
it’s strictly business
By Linda Lightfoot
While written for lawyers and other serious students of media law, this
book is nevertheless a handy reference for the editor in search of initial
guidance on legal issues at the core of what we do — gather and publish
news.
The supplement is not an easy read. It’s bereft of interesting anecdotes
or behind-the-scenes glimpses as to how or why a news organization landed
in court. The purpose of the book is not to analyze or critique either
the judgment of the news organization or the court. It’s not a newsman’s
view of what should be, but rather a scholarly presentation of what is.
The book is primarily a bottom-line compilation of the legal bases for
rulings in several categories of cases.
The decisions in the supplement are as recent as 1996, Most are from
federal appellate courts and state supreme courts and thus may carry substantial
weight when similar issues are litigated in other parts of the country.
The topics include the old regulars of news gathering — access, defamation,
invasion of privacy, prior restraint, subpoenas and confidential sources.
Also covered are some of the more fertile areas plowed primarily by
television news magazines: intrusion and trespass. Publishers and managers
can review opinions on the applicability of general laws to the media and
on commercial speech in general.
While the supplement can be read in isolation by editors generally familiar
with the case law, most of us are better served using it as it is meant
to be used — to update the main text, "Media Law" published in 1994. The
text gives context to the cases presented in the supplement. It includes
an overview of the jurisprudence as well as in-depth reporting on the landmark
decisions. The author uses those decisions to map out the current lay of
the land.
The reading is not easy. The footnotes are an obstacle in digesting
both the supplement and the main text. Yet, it is essential to read them
because they contain much of the most valuable information in the book.
There probably are very few editors who will read the text or the supplement
front to back, But the books are excellent reference works, good to have
on the shelf and particularly helpful in warning an editor off a course
of action or prodding him to get legal advice.
Reading the wide array of the latest reported cases — regardless of
whether a news organization is the plaintiff or defendant — brings to mind
the quote from Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes: "The constitution not
only is, but ought to be, what the judges say it is."
Even those who don’t subscribe to the "ought to be" portion of the quotation,
will come away from these books with an appreciation of how dependent the
press has become on the judicial branch of government.
Lightfoot is executive editor of The Advocate, Baton Rouge, La.
