last updated 1/1/2014

 Questions for 1/20

1. What are the essential features of democracy?  List them!  (3 or 4)
2. How does communication fit in with these features?  Ideally? In reality?
3. Are some kinds of communication more valuable/more important than others? What kinds?
4. What is the role/value of free expression in the economy? In science? In the arts?
5. Is there such a thing as dangerous communication?

  Questions for 1/27

1. After you have printed out and studied the handout on Ethical Traditions form the web site,  think of an ethical dilemma you have experienced or know about.  Determine what you thought was/is the "right" thing to do.  Can you determine which ethical tradition best fits your thinking on this issue?  Be prepared to discuss your response in class.
2. Which ethical trandition do you find most useful?  Which do you tend to use yourself?
3. Some one once said, "You can boil down all communication ethics to two points:  'Don't lie.  Be Nice'."  Is that really enough?  Why or why not?

Questions

1. What similarities and differences do you notice between the NCA and the PRSA ethics statements?
2. Is Karl Wallace's view too dated for a modern, diverse society and international communication system
3. Be prepared to discuss and analyze the Dallas "Cinema" case (found on the "Analyzing Ethics Cases" web handout) and the Sample Ethics Case.

 Questions for 1/31

1. Compare Madison's original version of the First Amendment to the actual amendment as adopted.  Which version do you prefer and why?
2. Alexander Hamilton and others argued against inclusion of a bill of rights in the Constitution because the rights of personal freedom ultimately depend on public opinion for support and the commitment of the people to liberty.  How do you respond to this argument?
3. Based on our discussion of the Free Speech Issues survey in class, what seem to be areas of agreement among class members.  What are areas of disagreement? 
4. Bring to class an outline of the key arguments in support of free expression as presented in Mill's chapter 2 of On Liberty (as assigned in class).  Be prepared to present/explain MIlls arguments and defend or reject them. Do you think there are additional reasons for protecting expression that Mill leaves out?
5. Is absolute freedom of expression practical for a democracy?  Why or Why not?

Questions for 2/10

1. Write your own version of an amendment to protect free expression.  Be prepared to present it to the class and support the changes you made.  What do you think is improved in your version?
2. What are the three "degree of danger" tests?  What are the advantages and disadvantages of each?  Which one do you prefer and why? 
3. Do you think the government should use a "degree of danger" test? 
4. Do we really need controls of any kind on political expression?  Do different times or circumstances call for different "degree of danger" tests?  [ e.g. times of war?  the "Red Scare/Smith Act?"  radical terrorism? ]
5. How would you explain the distinction (from Yates v U.S. and Brandenburg v Ohio) between ideas and illegal actions?  How should it be used?
   
6. Scan Eugene Debs "Canton Ohio Speech [excepts]" (1918) and pay attention to the key "controversial" sections in paragraphs 4-6, 46-51, 58-60, 83-93, 97 and 100-111.  Do you think he should have been jailed for these words?  Complete Debs Canton, Ohio Speech.
7. Do you think public school students have the right to sit and not participate in the "Pledge of Allegiance" to the flag?  Do they have the right to criticize school or other public officials in school?  On social media?
8. What is the ACLU policy concerning restraints on freedom of political expression?  Do you agree with it?
9. What rules does Monmouth College have on speech and speakers?
10. Although the Patriot Act does not directly criminalize speech, it has been criticized for creating a "chilly climate" for speech.  Does it?

  Questions for 2/11 and 13

1. Should government officials ever be allowed to sue for defamation concerning criticism of their official conduct?  for invasion of their personal privacy?
2. Do you think repealing defamation laws would be practical?  What would occur?  Would the "more speech" concept be sufficient?
3. Do you believe it is appropriate to permit suits for "group libel?"  [ suits that charge "My religion or my ethnic group was defamed." ]
4. Do you agree or disagree with the idea of punitive damages in defamation suits?

 Questions for 2/13

1. There is no mention of a "right to privacy" in the U.S. Constitution.  Do you think an amendment assuring a right to privacy would be a good idea?  How broad should such a right be?
2. Are you concerned about your "privacy rights" in this internet age?  Why or why not?
3. Should the government regulate communication and organizations on the internet to provide greater protections for individual privacy?  What should be regulated and how?
4. What do you think should be done about SLAPPs

  Questions for 2/24

1. Is it possible to define "obscenity" or "pornography" clearly?  Why or why not?  Draft some terms that you believe might improve previous definitions.
2. Is there any reason to restrict from consenting adults any material at all of a sexual nature?
3. Do adults have the right to be protected from "offensive" material?  If so, what restrictions would be appropriate?  inappropriate?
4. What sorts of restrictions should exist to protect children from sexually oriented materials?
5. Is it reasonable to set different standards for suggestive material for different media (e.g. internet vs DVDs vs broadcast TV vs cable vs video games)
6. Should we find a way to include violence in some way as a source of "obscenity (that is, unprotected expression)?
7. Do you think pornography is dangerous?  Or do you think it can play a useful role in society?
8. Examine the Illinois law on obscenity.  Is it clear.  Does it meet Supreme Court standards

  Questions for 3/2

1. Do you think there are such things as "fighting words" that can be punished by law? 
2. Do you accept the distinction begun in Chaplinski concerning "worthwhile" and "worthless" speech?
3. Is it ever appropriate for authorities (government or institutional) to silence a speaker in order to prevent lawlessness by the listenerswhen the speaker is not provoking it? Rowdiness or other offensiveness?  If so, when?

1. Some European countries have criminal laws against "hate speech."  Would such laws be useful in the United States?  Given that the evidence in a "Hate Crime" almost always requires statements of opinion by the accused, do hate crime prosecutions, therefore, violate the 1st Amendment?
2. Is it necessary or even appropriate to attempt to protect those who may be "wounded" by words?  Are there ways other than speech codes to accomplish protection of those who words may wound?
3. Should schools have restrictions on unacceptable forms of speech?  What kinds of expressions should be banned.  What kind of "notice" should be given to define what is unacceptable? 
4. Is the "N-word" (of perhaps a handful of other similar words) a term that should never be permitted to be used by anyone?  Or are there some circumstances in which it is appropriate or even neccessary?  What are the consequences of ruling some terms or concepts "unspeakable?"
5. What policies does Monmouth College have on "provocation" and "words that wound"?  Are they ones you find acceptable?  Why or Why not?  [ Bonus participation credit if you can answer this. ]

 Questions

1. Is there any REAL difference in consequence between prior restraint and ex post facto punishments?  Should First Amendment law recognize a difference and take prior restraint more seriously?
2. Make a list of conditions under which, you believe, the government should engage in prior restraint.  What standards would be needed to prevent abuse of such government powers?
3. How do you feel about broadcasters airing election predictions before the polls close.  Should that be illegal?  What about laws prohibiting electioneering near polling places?
4. What should the U.S. Government do about Wkileaks.  Is this issue similar or identical to the Pentagon Papers case?  Why or Why not?
5. Do campaign finance laws (McCain-Feingold) function as a form of prior restraint by prohibiting some groups and individuals from placing ads in the media near election dates?  How do you feel about the Citizens United case and it's effective repeal of limits on corporations and political speech?
6. Should the government be able to require/enforce "secrecy agreements" as a condition of employment for sensitive jobs (e.g. CIA)?  Should private groups be able to require secrecy as a part of law suit settlements, especially if the issues concern "the public interest?

Questions for 3/27

1. Are there good reasons to treat commercial speech as less protected than other forms of expression?  Why or why not?
2. Is it reasonable to consider corporations to be "persons" under the law with the same 1st Amendment rights as you or me?
3. Are the standards of SCOTUS issued in the "Consolidated Edison case appropriate?  Too restrictive of commercial speech?  Too lenient?
4. Should the FTC be more aggressive in regulating advertising and punishing "dishonest" commercial speech?

Questions for 3/31

1. To what degree to you think pre-trial publicity or other public discussion of court cases influences the outcomes of trials? How far (in reporting and speculating on criminal cases) is going too far?
2. How far should courts go in limiting press freedom?  Are limits on court officials sufficient?
3. Would limits on public access to courts or information about legal proceedings in order to protect the right to a fair trial be acceptable?  Why or why not?
4. Should reporters be granted special protections for their first amendment rights not available to other citizens (e.g. the right to decline to name sources)?   Who is a "reporter" these days?
5. Where shield laws do exist, how much protection should they provide to the press?  in terms of searches? testimony?
6. What kinds of government information should citizens generally have access to?  What information should the government be allowed to keep out of the public eye?
7. It is generally argued that we have less access to government information than in past decades.  Do you see that as a problem? Should it be easier and quicker to get information using the FOIA?
8. The President (and other executive officials) often argue that email and conversations within the executive branch should not be open to the public if the President is to receive honest, candid information from advisers.  Do you agree?

Questions for 4/7

1. What do you think are reasonable limits on student speech in K-12 schools?  What rights should be protected by the courts?
2. Are certain kinds of opinions off-limits for K-12 students to discuss or express opinions about? 
3. How do we draw the line between fair criticism of school officials and activities and "disruption" of the school?
4. Are dress codes a restriction of free expression rights? 
5. Is there any need to limit the speech of (public) college students beyond the usual time, manner, place restrictions on speech in government controlled locations?
6. Should governments act to insure that college faculty are "being fair" in presenting opinions or in evaluating student views?
7. Should the government use its authority over financial aid to guarantee speech rights to students in private colleges?
8. Is there any justification for restrictions on speech rights of K-12 or college teachers "off-campus" or in outside-of-work settings?
9. Should the Hatch act be repealed?
10. Make an argument in favor of (some) free speech rights for prisoners.

Questions for 4/17 and 4/22

1. Do you believe that copyright protections are necessary to provide a climate for creative and scholarly productivity in general?  In non-commercial settings?
2. Should intellectual property be considered to be the same as real, tangible property with the owner having the same rights?  If not, what are the differences?
3. Originally copyright allowed protection for a period of 28 years.  Now the length is the author's life plus 70 years.  Is the current length of copyright protection too long?
4. Do the current copyright laws (esp. the Digital Millennium Copyright Act) do more harm than good for advancing effective communication and culture in our society?
5. What are the harms of preventing protected material from entering the public domain?
6. What would you consider to be appropriate standards for "Fair Use" of copyrighted material?
7. Should colleges or other internet service providers serve as "police" to prevent illegal distribution of copyrighted material through file sharing?
8. Should there be additional limits on institutional or corporate control of copyrighted material?
9. Should copyright holders be allowed to use their ownership rights to prevent criticism and scholarship they don't like?