Media Regulation: USA

Regulation itself infers an ascribed set of standards or legal instruments by which certain actions, persons or groups are guided. These could be self-imposed or designed by an office of legal authority. In the evolution of the press, the existence of regulation; self-regulation or statutory regulation, referred to the decision by governments, other official decision-making bodies to promote certain forms of media structure and conduct, and media governance. It further includes the full range of formal and informal structures produced in governmental and non-governmental settings aimed at regulating the media systems in particular.

Thus, in countries around the world the necessity of press regulation is transposed in their approach to its implementation. This essay is dedicated to a critical examination of how the United States, Britain and Ireland have approached press regulation, through self-regulation as well as statutory regulations, the impact of these regulations on the press industry over the years as well as the current status of regulation in these countries.

Foremost, it is important to highlight the precedent that geared the necessity of press regulation to the forefront of the media industry, Freedom of the Press.  Freedom of the press protects the right to access and publish information or views without interference or fear of punishment by the authorities. This served to empower the press to disseminate stories, ideas and information, acts as a ‘natural symmetry of information between governors and the governed, and between competing private agents. It supported the watchdog role of the press, to promote transparency and public scrutiny of political officeholders by exposing corruption, maladministration and corporate wrongdoing. (UNESCO,2011)

However, the excesses of the press, perpetuated by conditions of employment, monopolies and influence of the press barons, government censorship, public attack outweighed the power of press freedom. The right to free speech as embedded in the constitutions of the named countries is not an absolute right, such that in any case of its infringement on other rights of a person or group of persons, the standards or legally binding protocols as directed under the constitution or existing regulatory bodies will be administered for the greater good of the society.

We will look at press regulation in each country, discussing the existing press regulation, how it is administered and the lacuna existing in each country.

1. USA

Legal Framework.

The provision of the First Amendment in the constitution of the United States is the foundation on which the freedom of the press was built upon for the sustainability of democracy. The amendment which was approved as part of the Bill of Rights in 1791 showed the nation’s belief in a free and vital press.

This existing legal framework is the tool that provides the limitations of the press on their freedom to publish and broadcast. The freedom of the press is not an absolute right; thus, its limitations are defined by the court system. The activities of the newspapers and magazines are largely unregulated but are limited by law in cases of slander, libel and defamation.

Privacy Rights:

Where the right to free speech conflicts with a citizen’s right not to be subject to false statements in the media, certain standards are upheld against the press. The press does not have a right to free speech on cases where information published is proven false. Most importantly in the cases of libel and slander, the media do not have a right to commit slander. Where a public figure claims to have been defamed. He/she must show the actions of the publisher as a reckless disregard or malicious intent while the private individual must argue that the publisher was negligent in ensuring the information was accurate before publishing it.

 This is evident in court ruling in the case of the New York Times CO. v Sullivan (1964), where the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Alabama Police commissioner who sued the New York times for publishing inaccurate statements

Notably, few or less newspapers and magazines are sued despite the number of untrue stories published daily.

Government Classified Documents:

The media possess a limited right to print documents that has been considered classified by the government. In cases where the media decides to publish such material, the responsibility lies on the court to determine what can be censored and what would be published. The bone of contention is determining what information is relevant to public interest and that which is in the interest of national security.

The case of the Pentagon Papers in 1971 heard by the Supreme court demystified the limitations of government censorship on information relevant to public interest. The US government had sued the New York Times and the Washington Post to prevent the publication of a classified report on the Vietnam War, the ruling stated that “the government despites its right to impose prior restraint on the publication of classified information, it conflicted on the need to inform the public of the actions of the government.

It is best for us to note that the court ruling on matters of press freedom would absolutely consider the extent to which the right to free press infringes on another legal right, such that it balances the interest of conflicting rights, and rules in favor of the right that is pivotal and more important in the context. It also takes into considerations the extent to which the information in question puts the democratic government in jeopardy or displaces order in the state.

THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION.

The television and radio broadcasters were not giving free hand as the newspapers and magazines. Their actions are regulated by the courts and a government regulatory commission.

The FCC acts as a police agency to regulate the content broadcasted over the airwaves across radio and television in accordance with the provisions of the 1934 Federal Commission Act. This form of regulation also has the authority to invoke fines, withhold broadcaster’s license in cases of violation. One of the key rules of the FCC are those regarding political campaigns, such as the Equal Time rule, Right of Rebuttal and The Fairness doctrine. These rules are set up to promote fairness and equal use of airtime during campaign periods amongst candidates.

 Also, the FCC maintains indecency regulations which aims at curbing indecent and profane material. The Supreme court also granted the FCC with the authority to regulate content. It allows broadcasters to show profane programming from 10am – 6pm to prevent children viewing.These rules are adhered to by broadcasting stations to maintain their license, but the FCC relies on the public to lay complaints about violations of equal time and indecency rules.

In 1996, the FCC changed its role from regulator to monitor based on the provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The Act gave limits tot the number of radio stations and television stations a single company could own. The FCC could now stop media monopolies, it supervises the purchasing of licenses and adjudicates consumer complaint against radio, television and telephone companies.

The Press industry in the U.S, though for a large part are free and unregulated with the exceptions of stated legislation and regulatory authorities, are very much unchecked, material considered to be libel and slander are printed under the notion of the opinion of the publisher. The Telecommunications Act despite its provisions has contributed to the homogenisaton of American culture, its loosened ownership restrictions creating few giant corporations such as Murdoch’s Media network, Walt Disney corporation, Viacom as well as Time-Warner.