Abstract
This article examines U.S. Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger's majority opinions in the Miller obscenity cases from a critical media studies perspective. Three primary assumptions common to a direct effects, transmission model of communication are identified as guiding Burger's opinions in these cases: (a) Mediated communication exerts a powerful influence over its audience; (b) it can affect audiences uniformly; and (c) halting the message at its source will protect the people from its negative effects. The implications of the Chief Justice's subscription to a direct effects model are discussed, with particular emphasis on their relevance for communication scholars and practitioners.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
