1. John Stuart Mill is credited with coining the philosophy of “the marketplace of ideas” to describe the principle upon which our First Amendment’s protection of free speech is based. Explain the concept of the “marketplace of ideas” and how it applies in the present day. Do you agree with this First Amendment principle? Why or why not?
2. The Washinton Post article makes the point that hate speech (speech that conveys racial, sexual or religious intolerance) is protected speech under the First Amendment, and cautions against trying to restrict it. The NY Times article goes on to say that America differs from most western countries in its protection of hate speech. Countries with legal structures similar to ours – e.g., Canada, the United Kingdom – say that protecting hate speech goes to far, and that hate speech should be banned. Do think hate speech should continue to be protected by the First Amendment, or should it be banned? Please state the reasons for your answer.
3. Based on your reading of the article “Safeguarding Free Speech” in the Chronicle of Higher Education, do you think CUNY’s policy regarding freedom of expression is a constitutional time, place and manner restriction on speech, or and unconstitutional attempt to suppress speech that expresses certain viewpoints? Please give reasons for your answer.
4. The modern day right of publicity stems from the common law privacy right of misappropriation. What does the right of publicity protect? Why is it important for people working in the arts and entertainment industries to understand the right of publicity? (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/06/20/cuny-considers-free-speech-policy?utm_source=Inside+Higher+Ed&utm_campaign=7bbb4dfd95-DNU20160620&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1fcbc04421-7bbb4dfd95-198227081)
5. Most rights of privacy/publicity have a “newsworthiness” exception. In other words, someone who would otherwise be violating these rights is allowed to if the topic, story or subject is “newsworthy,” that is, of legitimate interest to the public. This is a case where the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech may trump an individual’s rights of privacy/ publicity.
After reading the articles about Katherine Heigl suing the Duane Reed drugstore (which was settled out of court), do you think the tweet was commercial advertising, in which case it would violate her right of publicity, or news reporting, in which case it would not violate her right of publicity? Please give reasons to support your answer.
Articles about Katherine Heigl: