COMM 317: Facts, law ... and ethics

Here's a Christmas story that also illustrates how the facts and the law of a case can intersect in real life. For practice, read this story in the Los Angeles Times and be ready to answer:

• Which details in the story are statements of fact?
  
• Which details are interpretations of fact?
  
• Which details are statements of law?
  
• Which details are interpretations of law?
  

Some of them, since real life refuses to conform to the neat little categories beloved by journalism teachers, are both. The headline, for example, has elements of both.

Here's how I read it. The first part, "Santa in a G-string," is a statement of fact, right? But the second, "... gets a DUI," has elements of both. It's a fact that Santa -- actually one of Santa's little 280-pound helpers -- was charged with DUI. But the charge is based on an interpretation of a law passed by the California state legislature, which says you're presumed drunk if you blow more than 0.8 on a balloon test.

Now it's your turn. Go through the rest of the story. Which details are fact? Which are law? Why do you say that? Always when I give you exercises like this, I'm just as interested in your reasoning as I am in whether you get the "correct" answer. Post your answers as comments to this blogpost. I'll show you how if it's new to you. Or your classmates can show you how.

Now, here's a kicker.

One of last year's mass media law and ethics students, Jeremy Cook, pointed out the story has some real ethical angles, too. Does Santa's little helper here have a right to privacy? Was it violated by the story? Or do you waive your right to privacy when you show up wearing a G-string and a Santa hat on Christmas Eve in front of one of Hollywood's most heavily visited tourist spots?

One last question. What would Lord Coke, the 17th-century English judge who's quoted at the top of our syllabus, have said about this landmark court case?