Media Law and Media Ethics Introduction
When it comes to the field of communication, it is ideal for an individual to understand all areas of it. An instrumental aspect of this field is media law and media ethics. Both of these fields deserve to be examined in order for an individual to become well versed in all forms of media. Starting off with definitions, media law can simply be defined as the legal parameters of how communications within a society occur. What this means is that there is an overarching system in place which restricts how an individual may use a form of media, although the effects of using media may not always seem obvious. Some primary examples of media law include invasion of privacy, copyright infringement, or defamation. All of these things are aspects of communication which an individual must be aware of if they are using mass media to disseminate information such as television, radio, newspapers, magazines, or literature. It is important to understand, however, that media law does not only apply to reporters or journalists; it also applies to writers, speakers, public relations officers , and other professionals who may work in a position where they have to disseminate information using some form of media, oftentimes to a large audience. Media ethics, on the other hand, can be defined as the moral parameters of how communications within a society occur. A classic example of media ethics would be the idea of biased reporting—if a television news anchor exercises their personal bias while reporting about something, then the ethical thing to do is to disclose the fact that they are biased towards or against the subject of their report, as they have a duty to be fair. The law and ethics of a situation often overlap, therefore someone in a profession where media law and ethics are relevant must not only be concerned with what the law states, but also what is the most ethically correct response. As technology continues to rapidly evolve and society progresses into new forms of communication, both media law and media ethics will also continue to adapt. Individuals need to be conscious of the most recent developments within both of these fields in order to ensure that they are staying up to date on any existing laws or ethical concerns.
Core Principles of Media Law
Central to media law are freedoms of speech and press, the right to the newsgathering, and aspects of civil and criminal liability. Media ethics are often based on statutory and case law requirements.
In the United States, the First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of the press, although not absolute, as U.S. law permits some restrictions on free expression in order to balance individuals’ rights to privacy and reputation, and other competing interests.
In the United Kingdom, there are no laws guaranteeing freedom of speech or press, but various laws and a constitutional convention exist that provide for individual expression and limits on government censorship of publications.
Freedom of communication with the government, and among citizens, can lead to government intolerance towards certain views and strategies of controlling the media outlet.
Defamation, also known as defamation of character, is any statement that injures an individual’s reputation. Public figures are usually held to a higher standard when it comes to bringing forth a defamation suit because they must first show that the statement was made with "actual malice." Private figures have a lower burden and do not need to show "actual malice" — they need only show that the statement was made with negligence.
Privacy laws protect confidential communications, chord notes or separation with an employer, exploitation of likeness and identity, woman rights (abortion laws) and anti-discrimination laws.
Copyright law is the right of a publisher to control who uses a published original work, and to implement penalties against anyone who uses or copies their work without permission. Copyright law does not cover ideas, facts, or data.
Media Ethics Foundations
Ethics is the study of moral principles that govern behavior or the conducting of an activity. Media ethics specifically refers to the principles of ethics that govern the actions of those engaged in mass communication. Media law is concerned largely with the legal obligations of media professionals. Media ethics often addresses similar issues but from a different perspective. While the law establishes broad parameters for acceptable and lawful behavior, media ethics provides guidance on how to act ethically.
Although most people generally agree that ethical practice is important, ety inescapable in most situations. For example, media law prohibits libel, which is the publication of a false statement that damages a person’s reputation. But sometimes no matter how hard a reporter tries to verify the facts and report them accurately, he or she might still get it wrong. In that case, media ethics provides guidance on whether it would be appropriate to run a correction, issue an apology, etc.
It’s important to recognize that media law and media ethics don’t always overlap. For example, many states have anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuits against public participation) laws that allow for expedited dismissal of lawsuits that are really attempts to harass those who exercise their rights of petition and free speech in connection with public issues. But SLAPP-back lawsuits can be brought if the SLAPP lawsuit is brought without any merit. And even when the SLAPP-back lawsuit has merit, the defendant still has to go through the expense of hiring lawyers, making court appearances, and incurring other litigation costs. So media law, like all law, trumps no matter what. Even when the law allows for expedited dismissal, the courts still have to figure out which lawsuits should be dismissed. And some of these defendants are small businesses and first-time litigants for whom the expense of hiring lawyers is an enormous burden, even though they may have a strong defense.
Media ethics, similarly, is not a perfect system. Sometimes there are no right answers. In such cases, media professionals have an ethical duty to disclose their potential conflicts of interest, to disclose the potential bias of their sources, and to acknowledge that their decisions on how to report a case are made in the context of their own assumptions, preferences, values, and experiences.
Media Law Considerations
With the massive increase in opportunities for people to express themselves over the Internet, particularly through social media and blogging, the field of media law is under constant stress. That said, there remain legal challenges for media entities, such as lawsuits related to defamation, privacy breaches, and intellectual property.
Defamation is understood as the act of making a statement that is damaging to the reputation of an individual or business, which causes harm. A familiar example of defamation in the media world is a celebrity gossip magazine printing that a movie star is having an affair with her co-star. If the affair is untrue, and the magazine is aware that it’s untrue, or the magazine printed it without caring if it’s true, they may be liable for defaming the subject of their article. If the subject of the article becomes fired over it for immoral behavior, they may also have a cause of action, since the bookstore that carried the gossip magazine may no longer carry it, having decided to no longer be associated with the magazine.
Privacy breaches can occur for a variety of reasons, but in today’s world, they often occur because people think they are free to speak their mind freely, and think that if something is posted on a social media outlet like Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram, that it is somehow immune from suit. In 2015, for example, a teen posted a photo she’d taken of a judge to her private Instagram account. Shortly afterwards, that teen began receiving threatening messages online, as well as in the form of phone calls and emails, which some included details about her address. The teen had been named in the case, and the judge was not happy about being photographed at the courthouse, so she entered in ex parte (meaning that the judge decided the matter without the other side present) to issue a temporary order telling the teen to remove the photo, stop posting anything about the judge, as well as the source of her phone number, and to produce more evidence, which would include all of the content from her Instagram account.
The judge made her already difficult situation even more complicated by further ordering the teen to enter into an exclusive agent agreement, so that any profits gained from images of her would go to the judge. Even though the judge claimed that all she wanted was for the teen to stop posting about her, it seemed that her real intended goal was to gain a portion of the profit. (As the case progressed, the judge became the teen’s de facto agent, making it impossible for the teen to profit from any photos of her. The teen ended up withdrawing the teen from school for her protection.)
There’s also the possibility for losing rights to intellectual property, such as breaking a contract. In 2015, a man contracted a freelancer to design the logo for a new game he was producing, called Imploding Kittens. Unfortunately, the man decided he didn’t like the logo, which he claimed was unsolicited. There was no formal contract, so the freelancer did not agree to the work for hire provision, which would state that he gave away his rights to the logo design. As a result, the judge sided with the freelancer, and his logo was used on the product.
Digital Media and Ethics
The rise of the digital age has drastically changed the landscape for media ethics. With the growth of social media and the 24 hour news cycle, there is now an acceleration towards access to information and the public’s desire to be included in the dissemination of that information. However, this shift poses ethical dilemmas for media outlets across the country. The news cycle today is unprecedented: Newspapers have cut publication days or gone entirely digital. News is imparted by anyone with an internet connection. Facebook and Twitter allow users to create their own newsworthy sound bites while blogs have democratized expert opinions. The distinction between media and every day citizens is growing slimmer, yet most civilians are not bound by the same ethical standards as reporters and anchors.
On one hand, traditional media is losing loyal readership and airtime while "internet citizenry" is gaining trust within the public. On the other hand, traditional media entities have largely opted-in to social media. Often, the mainstream media has aligned itself with the "internet citizen" creating a marriage of convenience between old media and new technology. Yet, digitized news outlets, particularly blogs, also have the capacity and reach to break major stories. These outlets rarely subscribe to the ethical guidelines followed by the mainstream media, often by choice. Media outlets who do follow ethical guidelines are grappling with the reality that posts are often not tagged or attributed properly. Online readers expect news to be "free," but oftentimes the true cost of free news is its accuracy.
An increase in check-writing fees from newspapers and magazines, with their pre-digital budget costs can be expected. The newspaper industry is facing ethical dilemmas that few seem equipped to answer. The line between reporting on events and being a part of those events is becoming harder to navigate. As social media continues to take over, its growing influence will continue to affect media ethics, while neither side has enough control to overcome the other.
The Function of Media Law Regulation
The enforcement of media law and upholding of ethical standards are the purview of regulatory authorities that operate in both a national and international context. Media regulation is a complex area as it often deals with matters of free speech and self-regulatory bodies may even be established, when the regulatory body seeks to avoid imposing rules on journalists.
The UK has both a regulatory system and a self-regulatory system in place. Media law in relation to broadcasting and the press is overseen by regulatory bodies, who have substantial powers to implement the laws on their respective industries. In contrast, media self-regulation is operated by The Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO); a self-regulatory body that operates without legal powers.
In the US, media regulations operate at a federal level, with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) overseeing all media and communication regulation via the Communications Act 1934 , and its amendments. The FCC has the power to issue fines, revoke broadcaster licenses or send alleged perpetrators to jail. The system in Canada is similar, with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission — a quasi-judicial public authority that regulates the broadcasting and telecommunications sectors in Canada — enforcing the legislative provisions in the Broadcasting Act.
In Europe, the European Commission has certain powers and responsibilities to fulfil within the realm of media law. However, media law does not fall under a single EU policy area, nor does it fall under a common framework. Media regulation is left to the discretion of the individual EU Member States. The EU The Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) 2010/13/EU sets out obligations for EU member states but leaves it the discretion of the country to how they implement any provisions.
Freedom and Accountability in the Media
Responsible journalism recognizes that it must be balanced with the unreasoned and unreasoning parts of its mission. One side is truthfulness. Truthfulness is not just telling what is said but telling what is not known and what is left unsaid. Truthfulness is not publishing what causes harm.
In its search for information media law may have to tell the truth about disturbing or violent events, intrusive or malicious private conduct. Editors will insist on some editorial omissions so as not to cause unnecessary harm. Editors understand that in most cases accuracy embraces a range so that it is not an exact science. Editors accept that there are lapses they may not see.
Public exposure of particularly egregious ones can be damaging to "truth" over time. A media correction or apology may promote public information rather than ruin credibility. But careless, inadvertent, unexplained damage to reputation through error after error, impale public confidence in that media organization.
Some journalists step over the thin line dividing truthfulness from the presumption of "truth" which gives way to the presumption of "guilt." Each day in America we are all made aware through the media of the criminal charges against the deeds of persons. There is a period once those charges are made that the accused is presumed guilty. Assault on the accused may go well beyond what is lawful if the charge is horrendous. In some cases the public is presented with almost every minute detail of a gruesome crime. Whatever sympathy might be generated for the accused can easily be swamped out of mind before trial.
Lawyers know that a good trial defense is dependent upon a jury who make few emotional choices. The reporter may not have been able to exercise candor with the lawyer about a particular piece of information in the carelessness of the day: sleep deprivation, 5 hour days, drugs, bad food, 22 hour games of solitaire, flooded budgets, family alienation. But the reporters "truth" is not counter to the presumption of "innocence." Anything published about the state of mind of the crime committed by the perpetrator may be placed under a veil of the remorseful / non-remorseful.
Balancing this constitutional right of free speech with the the right to be free from libel, slander, defamation, tortious infliction of emotional distress and uncertainty of unshown conduct can be almost impossible.
The reporter knows the law somewhat better than the subject. Reporting is a skill usually not available in a monastery. The subject generally has access to no more than some counsel who hope to make a deal.
Much of the time there are no visible scales for balancing. Much of the time we all recoil at some story that occurred. It is never clear if the scales are balanced or if the weight was given to some irrelevant emotional trigger.
However we all desire to know the "truth." The law quite well balances these interests.
Trending Matters in Media Law and Ethics and the Future Impacts
The future of media law and media ethics will be shaped by rapidly evolving technological advancements. The popularity of augmented reality (AR) and artificial intelligence (AI) media news apps, like Hyper, Vizr, and Alexa Flash, will only continue to rise as platforms compete to provide users with the most up-to-date, convenient, and interactive news they seek. As these and other AR and AI apps develop and become more mainstream, interaction and engagement with news and information will increase substantially. While these new technologies may offer even more convenience and benefits to society, their widespread use may alter the way many traditional journalism norms are applied to cutting-edge news delivery methods. It is likely that greater clarity will be provided to laws governing privacy in the future. At present, however, an uncertain patchwork of federal and state laws regulates the collection of not only personally identifiable information, but also a range of data that, alone or in combination with other data, could be used to identify an individual, including through the use of AR and AI apps. Existing state and federal laws and ethical rules may need to be adapted or updated to accompany the ongoing use of modern technologies.
Final Thoughts on Media Law and Media Ethics
This article has provided an overview of the complex interplay between media law and media ethics. From the origins of media law in the U.S. Constitution to current debates about privacy, digital rights, and the role of government, the regulatory framework that governs the media continues to evolve. Amid these changes, ethical considerations surrounding the creation, presentation, and reception of media remain paramount.
As we navigated through the timeline, we explored key legal tenets such as defamation, the right to privacy, and intellectual property protections, as well as ethical challenges related to truthfulness, accuracy, and representation within the media landscape. Whether it’s balancing the need for national security with the public’s right to know, or establishing clear boundaries when it comes to children’s participation in media, these rules are informed by an ongoing discussion about what is morally acceptable in a media-saturated environment .
The relationship between media law and ethics is a reciprocal one. While laws set the minimum legal standards for permissible conduct, ethics challenge us to strive beyond legality and consider the societal implications of our media-related decisions. From responsible reporting to ethical advertising practices, the media is held to high standards that reflect both the letter and spirit of the law.
As history has shown, the field continues to grapple with new ethical challenges presented by modern technology. It will be important for both media creators and consumers to engage in an ongoing dialogue about the role of media in society.
Media law and ethics will undoubtedly continue to develop in response to emerging technologies, shifting societal norms, and legal advancements. It is the responsibility of all stakeholders—from content providers to policymakers to consumers—to remain informed and engaged in this ever-evolving field.