Daxton R. “Chip” Stewart

Up, Periscope: Mobile Streaming Video Technologies, Privacy in Public, and the Right to Record

Mobile streaming video technologies (MSVTs) such as Meerkat and Periscope, which allow users an easily accessible way to stream live video to followers, have the potential to reshape the way people think about any right to privacy they may have in public places, as well as the rights of people to record video in public places. Using legal research methodology, this article examines the privacy law and policy implications of MSVTs, finding that the intrusion and public disclosure torts are unequipped to provide remedies for potential privacy harms and that the First Amendment likely protects live streaming activities of users.

'Truthiness' and Second Level Agenda Setting: Satire News and Its Influence on Perceptions of Television News Credibility

This study examined the impact of satire news programs on perceptions of media credibility. Using second-level agenda setting as a theoretical framework, the results of this mixed-methods study show that negative portrayals of television news on these satire news shows make salient certain negative attributes that match viewers’ perceptions of credibility. A survey (N = 650) found that Daily Show/Colbert Report viewers had less positive views about the credibility of television news programs, while content analysis (N = 401) of 4 weeks of episodes of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report reflected the results of the survey, showing that television news programs, particularly those on cable, were more frequently portrayed negatively and made the target of jokes. The analysis shows television news is a frequent target of these satire shows’ criticisms and these shows’ negative attributes are made salient, which is reflected in the survey respondents’ low credibility scores for this medium.

Let the Sunshine In, or Else: An Examination of the “Teeth” of State and Federal Open Meetings and Open Records Laws

Public access laws are at the heart of transparent democracy, in place to ensure that government meetings and records are open to the public. However, compliance with these laws is often problematic, a fact that can be attributed, in part, to ineffective remedies available for violations of state and federal open government laws. This study examines the enforcement provisions of the public access laws in jurisdictions across the United States to explore the remedies available, including equitable relief such as injunctions and mandamus, actual and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, and civil and criminal sanctions. Structural difficulties were revealed that can make these remedies toothless for people unlawfully denied access. The article concludes by suggesting improvements such as enhanced and uniform penalties, more consistent enforcement, and alternatives to litigation.

When Retweets Attack: Are Twitter Users Liable for Republishing the Defamatory Tweets of Others?

Under the republication doctrine, repeating false and defamatory statements has traditionally triggered liability for the repeater. However, some confusion has emerged regarding retweeting posts of others on Twitter, the popular microblog site. Does retweeting the defamatory statement of another open the retweeter to liability? This article examines exceptions to the republication doctrine, such as the single publication rule, the wire service defense, and the Communications Decency Act (CDA) to answer this question. A review of court opinions leads to the conclusion that Section 230 of the CDA provides a powerful shield for users of interactive computer services such as Twitter.

Bringing Back Full Disclosure: A Call for Dismantling FOIA

The Freedom of Information Act began as a tool for ensuring full disclosure of federal government agencies, but it has consistently failed to live up to these expectations. Despite frequent amendments, FOIA remains a law rooted in an era of paper record-keeping, where files are created and stored by government, protected from release by decades of judicial expansion of exemptions, and remain largely hidden from public scrutiny. Modern computing technology should allow much easier and broader access for citizens, but FOIA needs radical transformation to reclaim its purpose. This article calls for a structural overhaul of FOIA focusing on proactive transparency, taking advantage of modern record-keeping technology such as open government portals and automation to enable citizen access to records as early as possible. Exceptions should be narrow and applied at the moment a record is created, and incentives should shift to favor disclosure in the face of agency inaction or delay.

Freedom's Vanguard: Horace Greeley on Threats to Press Freedom in the Early Years of the Penny Press

Abstract During the early years of the Penny Press, the concept of freedom of the press faced grave threats from government and citizens as journalism became more commercial and accessible. Horace Greeley, founder of the New-Yorker and the New-York Tribune and one of the most influential publishers of this era, stood up to these challenges in the 1830s and 1840s through numerous libel lawsuits, battles with the postmaster, and threats of physical violence from the public and political rivals. Greeley used his platform as a publisher and editor to link these dangers to press freedom as threats to American freedom and democracy that limited the ability of the press to serve as a watchdog and agent of social reform. This study, which examines Greeleys thoughts and actions when dealing with government and social constraints on publication in the pre-Civil War era, details Greeleys role in shaping modern understanding of press freedom in the formative years of the Penny Press.

Challenging Civil Contempt: The Limits of Judicial Power in Cases Involving Journalists

Despite their assertion of a First Amendment or common law reporters privilege in federal courts, journalists continue to face jail sentences and exorbitant fines for refusing to divulge their confidential sources when subpoenaed. Efforts to pass even a limited federal shield law have failed so far. This article offers another avenue to protect journalists—examining the roots of contempt law and policy to highlight limits on the contempt power of judges. It argues that because journalists are part of a group resting on steadfast moral and professional convictions, they may validly argue that confinement and excessive fines are improper sanctions. The article also suggests refinements in shield law proposals and other legislation to clarify the extent of judicial contempt power.