Fitting Past, Present and Future into One Law Course Syllabus

Abstract

In the preface of the seventh edition of Law of Mass Communication, Dwight Teeter and Don Le Duc (1992) seemed wistful in explaining the evolution of communications law since the book's first edition was published in 1969. It was all much simpler once, just a generation ago. (p. v). Rapid change and increased complexity have been a common theme in the prefaces of communications law textbooks published during the past decade (Hopkins, ed., 1999; Pember, 1999; Middleton, Chamberlin, and Bunker, 1997; Francois, 1994; Zelezny, 1997; Teeter and Le Duc, 1992; Carter, Franklin, and Wright, 1991; Holsinger, 1987). In the fourth edition of The Law of Public Communication, Middleton et al. (1997) said technological developments had prompted swift changes in the law since publication of the book's third edition in 1994. Greg Lisby (1992a), a former head of the Law Division of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, once commented that the changing legal landscape had made teaching communications law increasingly difficult. Communications law educators face the challenge of adding new materials to an undergraduate communications law survey course already filled with equally important material. Educators must teach such traditional communications law topics as libel, privacy, and access to information along with such new material as free expression in cyberspace and telecommunications regulation restructuring. The decisions that educators make regarding what to teach and what not to teach are important because the communications law survey course may be the only formal legal instruction many students receive before beginning their careers as professional communicators. Even students who do not plan careers as professional communicators need to know how the law affects such media as the Internet because it offers the opportunity for anyone to become a mass communicator. This makes regulation of free expression as important to private citizens as it is to professional communicators. This article reports results of a survey that measured how communications law educators are coping with the challenge of teaching an increasingly complex subject. Background Communications law is widely taught in journalism and mass communication programs. A 1995 survey found that 93 percent of accredited journalism and mass communication programs and 83 percent of non-accredited programs require a communications law course (Medsger, 1996). Many schools have two or three faculty who teach communications law courses (Scafella,1997). Ten percent of full-time journalism and mass communication faculty teach media law (Weaver and Wilhoit,1988). Published empirical data showing how the content of communications law courses and teaching methods have changed over time is scarce. Yet, changes in communications law education have occurred within the context of changes occurring in journalism education generally. Journalism programs were once designed to prepare students for print journalism careers, and communications law courses sought to teach future editors and reporters how to avoid legal difficulties on the job.' (Middleton and Chamberlin, 1988). Communications law research and communications law textbooks emphasized current law as it applied to the press (Lule, 1990; Gillmor and Dennis, 1989). Over the past two decades, though, the career interests of many students in journalism programs have changed. The number of students concentrating on news-editorial or broadcasting has declined while the number of students in public relations and advertising has increased (Lisby, Rubin, Hermanson, and Bick, 1993; Middleton and Chamberlin, 1988; Martinson and Bogue, 1987; Rainbolt, 1984). Despite these changes, some say communications law textbooks remain oriented toward journalism and do not devote enough attention to advertising and public relations (Lisby et al. …