Communications 317: Media Law

Benedictine University at Springfield

Spring Semester 2008

"So as grave and learned men may doubt, without any imputation to them; for the most learned doubteth most, and the more ignorant for the most part are the more bold and peremptory." -- Sir Edward Coke, Institutes of the Lawes of England (1628) Sect 338a.
Final Exam – May 8, 2008

FINAL EXAM -- May 8, 2008

Below are one 50-point essay question and two 25-point short essay questions. Please write at least four pages (1,000 words) on the 50-point essay and two pages (500 words) on each of the 25-point essays. Due at the regularly scheduled time for our exam, 1:30 p.m., Thursday, May 8.

1. Essay (50 points). In his dissenting opinion in Abrams v. U.S. (1919), Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. defined the “marketplace of ideas” under the First Amendment as a realization that “the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas ... [and] the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out.” guarantees a free market of ideas. What is the ethical responsibility to the marketplace of: (a) political candidates; (b) the news media; and (c) professional advocates working for campaigns. How well, in your opinion, have this year’s presidential primary elections functioned as a marketplace of ideas? Do professionals, both working for the media and in the campaigns, have a greater ethical burden under the respective codes of ethics for journalists and public relations people than the candidates? Be specific!

2a. Self-reflective essay (25 points). What do you consider the most important thing you have you learned in COMM 317 that you didn’t know before? Why do you say it is the most important? Be specific in your discussion of how it might fit into your career plans, or your plans for further study. Consider it in the context of what you knew at the beginning of the course and what you know now. In grading this essay, I will evaluate the relevance of your discussion to the main goals and objectives of the course; the specific detail you cite to support or illustrate your points; and the specific connections you make.

2b. Short essay (25 points). As the newly appointed travel editor for The Prairie Clarion in Clarey’s Prairie, Ill., you receive the offer of an all-expenses-paid weekend visit to Anthracite Acres, a tourist resort built on top of a reclaimed strip mine in beautiful Hogscour, W.Va. Ever mindful of the SPJ Code of Ethics, you’re a little nervous about conflicts of interest, but the PR guy for the resort says you’re free to write anything you want about your visit, even if you discover the mountaintop was improperly reclaimed. After deadline, you are sharing a pitcher of the beverage of your choice with Aristotle, Jeremy Bentham and Immanuel Kant (hey, this is a hypothetical case). What does the Code of Ethics say about situations like this? What would Aristotle, Kant and Bentham say? How would they explain their reasoning? What principles would they cite, and why?