Blogs of The New York Times and Constraints on the First Amendment

The New York Times has always been a constant dominating force in the news industry. When chosen to present over an aspect of the news industry, I immediately thought of this iconic newspaper and its rich history. I decided to narrow my topic of the New York Times even further and focus on a new upcoming trend in the news world: blogs. Blogs have proven to be not only relevant sources of information on specialized topics and a much more efficient way for citizen journalists to share their content, but also very influential in regards to certain current events and discussions. The New York Times' many specialized blogs prove its constant adaptation to new media trends.

In response to this week's question, which was "What are the constraints on free speech and the First Amendment for the news industry?", I first listed content not protected by the First Amendment, which includes defamation, libel, slander, obscenity, copyright violation, and child pornography, and how blogs and citizen journalists are not immune to these first amendment exceptions. Likewise, the blogging world can make punishing unprotected content difficult due to anonymous sources and the vast internet users spread out over the world. However, the blogging world, as shown through the New York Times blogs, enables more free speech due to use of commentary on blogposts, a feature not enabled on their regular news articles. By allowing commentary, these blogs enable internet users to have open discussions, share ideas and opinions, and even interact with writers of the blogposts. However, there is mild censorship of comments from the New York Times and this newspaper's use of blogs could ultimately help them regain more power over news content, which was power gained by the citizen journalist bloggers when they became the content providers. These two red flags should be carefully monitored because they could potentially constrain free speech in blogposts and commentary posts.

After my presentation, discussion began about commentators tendency to "troll" or post their comments repeatedly without offering any relevant information or opinions. Another student remarked on how other commentators would often post comments that went on tangents that were unrelated to the actual topic of the blogpost. Both students insinuated that this type of commentary should be censored and removed. Another student responded to my question about whether blogs will be run by citizen journalists or major news corporations in the future by stating that the amount of citizen journalist blogs have increased but barriers to entry prevent them from gaining more followers as opposed to the New York Times, a corporation that has money to promote their new blogs.

Links relating to the case study:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/blogs/directory.html?_r=0 -New York Times Blogs
http://www.utsc.utoronto.ca/~farrell/blogpaperfinal.pdf -History and current information about blogs
http://jclass.umd.edu/classes/jour698m/meraz.pdf -Study discussing whether blogs are becoming tools for major news corporations

Sources:
47 U.S. Code § 230 - Protection for private blocking and screening of offensive material. (1996, January 1). Retrieved October 6, 2014.
Balkin, J. (2009). The Future of Free Expression in a Digital Age. Yale Law School Legal Scholarship Repository.
Cohen, H. (2008, January 9). Freedom of Speech and Press: Exceptions to the First Amendment. Retrieved October 6, 2014, from http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/110843.pdf
Drezner, D., & Farrell, H. (2004, August 1). The Power and Politics of Blogs. Retrieved October 6, 2014.
Meraz, S. (2009). S There an Elite Hold? Traditional Media to Social Media Agenda Setting Influence in Blog Networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(3), 682-707.
Straubhaar, J., & LaRose, R. (2012). Print to Digital Newspapers. In Media now: Understanding media culture and technology (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.
Reynolds, G. (2007). Libel in the Blogosphere: Some Preliminary Thoughts (Final Version). Washington Law Review, 84, 1157-1157.

The News Industry, Defamation and the “Bag Men”

The News Industry plays a large role on what information is being disseminated to the public through television, newspapers and the internet. This week's theme revolved around the News Industry and also the question, "What are the constraints on free speech and the First Amendment for the news industry?" For my case study that I presented to the class, I answered the previous question by focusing on a recent settlement case relating to the defamation of individuals wrongfully accused of conducting the Boston Marathon Bombing.

The main point that I discussed during my presentation of the case study was how “New Media” played a significant role of the information being broadcasted by the New York Post. With the New York Post stating that the “Feds seek these two pictured at Boston Marathon”, they were inciting that the two individuals pictured were subjects that needed to be apprehended. This statement of libel defamation led to a damage of reputation and even emotional distress to the targeted individuals. To support my argument of how defamation affected the individual defamed, I played this video clip (http://youtu.be/6ye92hPDlFE?t=52s) in class. The video is a personal interview that shows how emotionally distraught the whole situation left, then 17 year old Salaheddin Baroumm.

After my presentation, discussion began on how social media helped garner the unwanted attention toward the two innocent individuals. With the ability to instantly spread news through Facebook posts, Twitter Retweets, and other social media platforms, it is quite difficult to control the spread of information when exposed to hundreds of users. Racial profiling and internet hysteria were also discussed as playing a huge part in the wrongful accusations due to the horrific event that occurred.

Sources:

Doskow, E. (n.d.). Defamation Law Made Simple | Nolo.com. Retrieved October 7, 2014.

Holman, E A, Holman, D R, & Garfin, R C. (2014). Media. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(1), 93-98.

Straubhaar, J., Larose, R., & Davenport, L. (2014). Print to Digital Newspapers. In Media Now: Understanding Media, Culture, and Technology (8th ed., pp. 123-124). Boston: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

U. S. Constitution, Amendment 1

Vamialis, A. (2013). Online defamation: confronting anonymity. International Journal of Law and Information Technology,   21(1), 31-65.

Wemple, E. (2014, October 2). New York Post settles ‘Bag Men’ defamation suit. Retrieved October 7, 2014.

Apple as a Global Media Firm

This week's question was "How does Globalization shape global media product and industry?". My case study focused on global media firms, global marketing strategy, and barriers to entry through the company Apple.

Globalization is the phenomenon of producing and organizing media by drawing on international genres. My case study displayed globalization because I discussed how Apple produces a global telecommunications product, the iPhone. Apple is recognized and sells to over 120 countries. Apple is one of the top media firms in the world, as seen through their $37.4 billion global profit just from the first quarter of 2014- that was before the iPhone 6 was even released (Apple.com). I discussed Apple's specific marketing strategy that has three main points: empathy with the customer, their focus on making a one product of each genre, and the importance of having impute- producing everything with excellence.

Apple's global marketing strategy is obviously effective because of the way citizens around the world responded to the release of the iPhone 6. This article is an excellent view into the release of the iPhone 6 this past month: http://www.cnet.com/pictures/apple-iphone-6-goes-on-sale-around-the-globe-pictures/34/. All around the world, crowds of hundreds to thousands gathered to get the latest iPhone because of the mystery and hype surrounding the release.

However, the iPhone 6 isn't available to be sold in China. This is ironic because China is the world's largest supplier and manufacturer of Apple's products, with 349 locations along Apple's supply chain. This is because China placed a barrier to entry on Apple, because their government agency that regulates technology has not cleared the iPhone 6's LTE Networks. It is unknown when the iPhone 6 will be available to be sold in China.

I believe my discussion went very well. A classmate brought up an excellent point that the ban on the iPhone 6 creates even more hype for the product in China, which ends up contributing to Apple's marketing release strategy and might actually be an asset for Apple. He also discussed that this creates a market for the newly abandoned iPhone 5's to be subsidized in China. Another classmate discussed how Apple's marketing strategy has developed over the years, from the artistic and loud advertisements in 1984 to the sleek, mysterious advertisements seen now. We discussed if this was a part of their marketing strategy to keep things excellent and focused, or if Apple knows it is a brand cult and can now market minimally, while still profiting exponentially.

Overall, I gained a lot of understanding about global media products and marketing from this case study. Previously, I had no idea about how Apple is received around the world, nor did I realize the intensity of the Chinese government's regulation on "foreign" products- even though the iPhone is predominately manufactured within their borders. I think Apple was a great company to use as an example of a global media firm and after this presentation, I think I'm even more of a "Team Mac" person.

SOURCES:
Apple. (2014). Supplier Responsibility and Accountability. Retrieved September 23, 2014.

Bora, K. (2013, November 13). Is Apple's China Strategy Paying Off? Report Says Company Beat ZTE To Enter The Top 5 In Chinese Smartphone Market. Retrieved September 23, 2014.

Grobart, S. (2013, September 19). Apple Chiefs Discuss Strategy, Market Share- and the new iPhones. Retrieved September 23, 2014.

Lam, S. (2014, September 11). China misses out on first wave of new iPhone releases. Retrieved September 23, 2014.

Lynch, R. (2014, January 1). Strategic Management Case plus Case Answer – Apple’s Profitable but Risky Strategy. Retrieved September 23, 2014.

Meyers, M. (2014, September 19). Apple 6 goes on sale around the world. Retrieved September 23, 2014.

Moorman, C. (2012, July 10). Why Apple Is a Great Marketer. Retrieved September 23, 2014.

New Vision. (2014, September 19). Chinese buyers lead charge in iPhone 6 global debut. Retrieved September 23, 2014.

Young, D. (2014, September 15). China Falls Off iPhones 6 Launch Map. Retrieved September 23, 2014.

Global Media: Globalization and Disney's Aladdin

The question my case study answered was, "How does globalization shape media products and industry?". I focused specifically on how globalization has produced some negative effects as seen in Disney’s strategies of how they represent and portray certain cultures.

Globalization is an effect of cultural transmission processes and the breaking down of boundaries. Disney’s globalization strategy consists of targeting various racial backgrounds and ethnic groups and tailoring their films toward that population, such as Aladdin representing the Arabian culture. In addition, Disney uses stereotypes from the American point of view and incorporates music/rhythmic beats and melodies pertaining to that culture. The primary issue associated with globalization is reflecting racist stereotypes (Spector, Alan J.). Aladdin illustrates Disney’s globalization strategy by employing negative stereotypes which are less empowering. There was a significant amount of controversy over Aladdin, including the lyrics in the song “Arabian Nights”, the scene where an Arab merchant attempts to slice off Princess Jasmine’s hand, and feminists objecting to Disney’s derogatory representation of Jasmine. Through my case study, I learned in order for a company to be successful globally, it needs to be diverse and sensitive to the cultures and customs for its desired market. Ultimately, heavy Western influence across the globe can cause the blending of cultures, thus creating a more narrow perception. Through this process, you lose what makes your culture unique, as explained by Cowen.

The class discussion sparked other perspectives on additional Disney controversies, which included the film Mulan. The only question that took longer for students to answer was “What advice would you give Disney research and development on a future film project incorporating globalization?” I was able to rephrase my question and state my answer. I agreed that they should submerse themselves in the culture for several months before writing the script.

Sources:

James, Randy. (2009). Top 10 Disney Controversies: Aladdin, Time, pp. 2

Lebedko, Maria G. (2014). Globalization, Networking and Intercultural Communication. Intercultural Communication Studies, pp. 28-41.

Lustyik, Katalin. (2013). Disney's High School Musical: Music Makes the World Go 'Round', Interactions: Studies in Communication & Culture, pp. 239-253.

Spector, Alan J. (1998). Disney Does Diversity: The Social Context of Racial-Ethnic Imagery. Cultural Diversity and the U.S. Media, pp. 41-309.

Straubhaar, Joseph, Robert Larose, and Lucinda Davenport. (2013) Media Now: Understanding Media, Culture, and Technology. Belmont, CA.: Wadsworth Company.

10 Disney Characters Who Stirred Up Controversy, Graphic Design Degrees RSS.

Net Neutrality

Who controls and monitors the Media? In terms of the internet, this question cannot be answered without first identifying the major actors in producing content and providing access to that content within the network. In the case study of Net Neutrality we are able to reveal these actors as the FCC, ISPs, content providers, and consumers [the individual users]. This case study helps us better understand their roles in the internet, and the issues of control and monitoring of the internet as power struggles between these actors.

Net neutrality is the idea of an open and free internet for users and content.(FCC.gov) It has been an issue since 2010, when the FCC implemented rules upon ISPs that required the equal treatment of all content across the network. In January of 2014, a federal appeals court threw out these rules opening new loopholes that could result in larger ISP corporations creating two lanes of the internet, and charging content providers to move information across the faster lane. (Nagesh) The FCC has the power to propose new rules or enact regulatory statutes that would make the internet a utility, similar to phone service. While it has not made a decision on which action it will take, the FCC has allowed consumers to voice their opinions on the matter in an online comments section. (FCC.gov)

Discussion of this case study in class was largely based on the repercussions of this policy on the consumers’ access to media content. Limiting broadband speeds with fees could mean loading screens and extended buffering for online content. As discussed, it minimizes Freedom of Speech, by restraining the marketplace of ideas and our ability to share ideas. We also mentioned that restricting internet speeds could be a restraint to trade, because it will limit competition to only those who are willing to pay.

Cool links with more information:

Vimeo Net Neutrality protest video: http://vimeo.com/105602328

Article on online protest: http://online.wsj.com/articles/websites-plan-online-protest-backing-net-neutrality-wednesday-1410298792

Sources:

Blackburn, Marsha, and Michael O'Rielly.(2014). "A Closer Look at Net Neutrality." National Review Online. Accessed. 15 Sept 2014. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/382367/closer-look-net-neutrality-marsha-blackburn-michael-orielly

Encyclopedia. PCmag.com. Accessed. 15 Sept. 2014.
http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia/term/40275/content-provider


Federal Communications Commission. (23 July 2014) FCC.gov. Accessed 15 Sept. 2014. http://www.fcc.gov/guides/open-internet.

House OKs 'Net Neutrality' Rules Ban."(11 Apr. 2011) CQ Weekly : 813. Web. 16 Sept. 2014. http://library.cqpress.com.lib-ezproxy.tamu.edu:2048/cqweekly/document.php?id=weeklyreport112-000003849549


Nagesh, Gautham. (14 Jan. 2010) “Court Tosses Rules of Road for Internet” Wall Street Journal.
Web. 16 Sept. 2014. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304049704579320500441593462

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

My case study was over the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case. In it, I explored the political spending of corporations and the effect it has had on different types of media, including political ads, documentaries and stand alone programming, traditional news media and the average voter. In this, I attempted to answer the question of the week: "who controls/monitors the media?"

The Citizens United case was the Supreme Court's ruling that the government can't regulate independent political expenditures by corporations. This differed from the past in that it was the first time that companies and labor unions can now use unlimited amounts of their money to expressly advocate for a candidate. Past laws such as the Tillman Act of 1907 and Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 had previously prohibited this, but in 2010, these were overturned by Citizens United. This has changed media in that it's made it possible for corporations to support much more speech through radio and TV ads. Companies can now also produce documentaries either for or against a candidate. As a result, the traditional news media has become more cluttered and the average voter is much more likely to be misled by talking points, soundbites and propaganda masquerading as news.

The discussion that followed was centered mostly different people's opinions of the ruling. The general consensus of the class was that the ruling would lead to more corruption and that it was a problem when trying to define free speech like the book talked about. Most people said they saw it crossing the line of free speech and that this right shouldn't be extended to corporations. I asked if the class thought it would be more difficult to distinguish news from corporate propaganda and the general response was that it was already difficult to tell and that they thought the ruling would make it even more difficult. This brought it back around to the question of the week. The government is giving up a little more of its control to monitor and regulate the media (in the political spectrum at least) and the full consequences of this will be seen in the coming years as the case develops.

Sources: 

•Chatillon, D. (2010). Citizens United: Coining Soon to a Cable Broadcast and Satellite Channel near You!. Communications Lawyer, 27(1), 1-32.

•Kerr, R. L. (2011). Transforming Corporate Political Media Spending into Freedom of Speech: A Story of Alchemy and Finesse, 1977-78. American Journalism, 28(1), 34-74.

•WALZ, C. N. (2011). Campaigns Turn to Courts over Political Advertising. Communications Lawyer, 28(1), 3-7.

The Comcast and Time Warner Cable Merger

The question that my case study sought to answer was, "Who controls and monitors the media?". I chose to focus on the FCC's monitoring of the broadcast industry through, the proposed merger between Time Warner Cable and Comcast.

The role of the FCC is to monitor the broadcast industry to ensure that it acts in the public's best interest. The concern is that this merger is a form of horizontal integration (Straubhaar, Larose, Davenport), that will lead to a monopoly in the cable industry. I presented the concerns of some other companies that Comcast will be able to get content for cheaper rates and the fear that this will negatively impact internet streaming as Comcast will charge higher rates for buffer free internet (Eggerton). I Talked about Comcast's defense, that they and TWC do not operate in the same major markets and their belief that this will help bridge the digital divide.

The discussion that followed the case study focused primarily on if the class had a problem with this potential merger, and the general answer was, "No". My classmates did not feel this would hurt competition.When asked if they believed it would get blocked, one student said it would not because Comcast has a way of getting what it wants, which I found interesting. And when I asked if students had a problem with a body that is overseen by the government regulating private businesses, one of my classmates said that she did not because it helps prevent monopolies. One student also asked me if there was recent precedent for the FCC blocking a similar merger. The response that I had was the proposed AT&T and T-mobile merger that was never officially blocked because it was taken off the table by AT&T when it became clear the FCC would not approve it.This brought me back to the question for the week, the decisions that the FCC makes are very complex maybe this merger is not a big deal, but maybe the impact of their decision could set a precedent in terms of the control the FCC has on the shape of the broadcast industry.

Sources:

Eggerton, J. (2014). FCC Hears Plenty From Comcast/TWC Opponents. Broadcasting & Cable, 144(32): 24.

Following the 1996 Telecommunications Act: Media Mergers and the Public Interest Standard. (2012). Conference Papers -- International Communication Association, 1-39

Kang, Cecilia. (2014 September 9). “A lot of people don’t like the Comcast-Time Warner merger, but that doesn’t mean it won’t be approved.” The Washington Post. Retrieved from                                                                                  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/09/03/a-lot-of-people-dont-like-the-comcast-time-warner-merger-but-that-doesnt-mean-it-wont-be-approved/      

Straubhaar, Joseph, Robert Larose and Lucinda Davenport. (2014). Media Now: Understanding Media, Culture, and Technology. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Company.