Much as journalist argue that they have a “right to know,” scholars at public universities lay cl... more Much as journalist argue that they have a “right to know,” scholars at public universities lay claim to their “right to academic freedom.” In both cases, these “rights” carry little weight constitutionally. But, just how much protection is actually afforded to academics through the First Amendment? This article addresses this question in light of the convergence of two elements—the corporatization of public universities and the ruling in the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court case Garcetti v. Ceballos (which heavily suggests that public employee speech does not qualify for the same level of First Amendment protection as private citizen speech). Finally, this article proposes a solution to the current crises, a solution that includes creating a constitutionally protected category of speech for academic inquiry at state colleges and universities.
There is no way to overstate the severity of the problems related to social inequality today, and... more There is no way to overstate the severity of the problems related to social inequality today, and treatment of hate speech in the United States is problematic in light of these escalating tensions. Long-standing arguments that free speech serves as a societal pressure valve and that open speech leads to truth hold little sway when, 200 years later, hatred against groups based on their identities is still rampant and insidious. The concept of hate speech and the subsequent calls for possible restriction raise complicated issues. This article proposes a shift in emphasis from the negative protection of individual rights instead toward a more positive support of social equality. Utilizing Axel Honneth’s theory of recognition, this article develops a two-tiered framework for free speech analysis that will promote a strategy for combating hate speech in the global twenty-first century.
Journal of Applied Journalism & Media Studies, 2019
This article explores the collaborative exchange programme that both authors have been involved i... more This article explores the collaborative exchange programme that both authors have been involved in as the faculty supervisors for more than fifteen years. In this programme students from the US and Russian universities come together to write, design and produce a media project at each other’'s campuses. From working as an international team, students from both countries practice journalism skills and learn about different cultural and professional traditions, which cannot be reproduced in textbooks or classrooms. In the study, which includes survey responses from 61 former programme participants, the authors measure the success of the programme in two main areas: as a highly impactful study-abroad experience and its ability to foster collaboration and cooperation in journalism education across borders. Based on the responses to the survey, the authors were able to evaluate the long-lasting impact on the students who participate, indicating that during the process they gain not only valuable journalistic skills but also cross-cultural experiences that have a positive impact on their future careers.
... Page 8. viii Acknowledgments Forell. Most ... seriously. Finally, I owe the highest gratitude... more ... Page 8. viii Acknowledgments Forell. Most ... seriously. Finally, I owe the highest gratitude to Hannah Arnoske and Adrienne Ione. Hannah, your companionship and unconditional love throughout the writing of this book were immeasurable. ...
International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics, 2005
Well-known examples of how media owners manipulated coverage of the war during the first six mont... more Well-known examples of how media owners manipulated coverage of the war during the first six months include Cumulus Media's edict that its radio stations broadcast only pro-war stories; the firing of Peter Arnett by NBC because of one of his broadcasts from Iraq; and MSNBC's cancelling of the Phil Donahue Show because the network believed the show would be a conduit for the liberal anti-war agenda. Lesser-known examples of ownership interference in war-related coverage have occurred throughout the United States at smaller media outlets, where reporters have been fired, demoted, or otherwise reprimanded for participating in anti-war activities on their own time (FAIR 2003).
By protecting dissident speech, the First Amendment purports to offer a way for subordinate socia... more By protecting dissident speech, the First Amendment purports to offer a way for subordinate social groups to participate in political discourse, to hold and exercise power through communication. However, in recent years, legal scholars have begun to question the traditional principles inherent in First Amendment doctrine and the reliance by the Supreme Court on what could be considered an outdated idea of liberty. This article argues that individuals and groups are socially constructed and, as a result, current traditional liberal theory and its reliance on the autonomous individual fail to address societal power and speech's role in that power dynamic. Specifically, the article offers a new framework for free speech cases that would consider context-both historical and individual-in addition to in-place doctrinal tests.
Following Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush Administration began imposing every increasing limitations on ... more Following Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush Administration began imposing every increasing limitations on civil rights. One example is the implementation of free speech zones, a practice in which political dissidents are cordoned off from the President during public appearances. While these zones originated in the 1980s, the use of them has grown considerably in the past few years. Critics argue that moving protesters to a remote location during Presidential events gives the impression that there is no dissent. This paper explores the constitutionality of free speech zones, ultimately demonstrating the shortcomings of the true threats doctrine, a legal framework for analysis in cases dealing with speech that may be threatening. This article suggests an alternative framework for analysis that would 1) better balance national security interests with speech protection for political dissidents and 2) clear up some of the doctrinal confusion in the application of the true threats doctrine in general.
Journal of Technologies in Knowledge Sharing, 2015
The nature of academic freedom in the digital age now shifts and transforms as rapidly as the too... more The nature of academic freedom in the digital age now shifts and transforms as rapidly as the tools used to call it to question. This paper explores examples of U.S. institutions of higher education attempting to address the reach and implications of social media within the rights of academic expression, often with results antithetical to the notion of academic inquiry and rights held so dear in its production. We are entering a time when knowledge is increasingly socially and openly constructed. The creation of intellectual thought reaches (often resides) far outside the walls of the academy. If higher education is to continue serving as a respected creation center and collaborator in knowledge that serves society, one cannot discount the need to adapt to the tools and habits of shared and social knowledge. This paper explores the intersection of conflict for academic freedom and digital footprints. It puts forward a framework for the use of collaboration software in defining teaching and learning that is open, social and without walls.
Much as journalist argue that they have a “right to know,” scholars at public
universities lay cl... more Much as journalist argue that they have a “right to know,” scholars at public universities lay claim to their “right to academic freedom.” In both cases, these “rights” carry little weight constitutionally. But, just how much protection is actually afforded to academics through the First Amendment? This article addresses this question in light of the convergence of two elements—the corporatization of public universities and the ruling in the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court case Garcetti v. Ceballos (which heavily suggests that public employee speech does not qualify for the same level of First Amendment protection as private citizen speech). Finally, this article proposes a solution to the current crises, a solution that includes creating a constitutionally protected category of speech for academic inquiry at state colleges and universities.
Journal of Applied Journalism & Media Studies, 2019
This article explores the collaborative exchange programme that both authors have been involved i... more This article explores the collaborative exchange programme that both authors have been involved in as the faculty supervisors for more than fifteen years. In this programme students from the US and Russian universities come together to write, design and produce a media project at each other’'s campuses. From working as an international team, students from both countries practice journalism skills and learn about different cultural and professional traditions, which cannot be reproduced in textbooks or classrooms. In the study, which includes survey responses from 61 former programme participants, the authors measure the success of the programme in two main areas: as a highly impactful study-abroad experience and its ability to foster collaboration and cooperation in journalism education across borders. Based on the responses to the survey, the authors were able to evaluate the long-lasting impact on the students who participate, indicating that during the process they gain not only valuable journalistic skills but also cross-cultural experiences that have a positive impact on their future careers.
There is no way to overstate the severity of the problems related to
social inequality today, and... more There is no way to overstate the severity of the problems related to social inequality today, and treatment of hate speech in the United States is problematic in light of these escalating tensions. Longstanding arguments that free speech serves as a societal pressure valve and that open speech leads to truth hold little sway when, 200 years later, hatred against groups based on their identities is still rampant and insidious. The concept of hate speech and the subsequent calls for possible restriction raise complicated issues. This article proposes a shift in emphasis from the negative protection of individual rights instead toward a more positive support of social equality. Utilizing Axel Honneth’s theory of recognition, this article develops a two-tiered framework for free speech analysis that will promote a strategy for combating hate speech in the global twenty-first century.
Modern Power and Free Speech: Contemporary Culture and Issues of Equality, 2009
Modern Power and Free Speech explores the complicated relationship between the First Amendment an... more Modern Power and Free Speech explores the complicated relationship between the First Amendment and culturally disempowered and groups within the United States. By focusing on hate speech, Internet pornography, and political dissent, Chris Demaske analyzes First Amendment discourse and doctrine and questions the role of the concept of the autonomous individual. Demaske asserts that the presupposed equality of so-called 'autonomous individuals' does not exist and goes on to show how these specious claims to equality only serve to further silence those marginalized members of American society. Combining legal analysis, First Amendment theory, feminist theory, and political theory, Chris Demaske addresses the inadequacies of current free-speech doctrine and provides a possible solution to remedy them.
Much as journalist argue that they have a “right to know,” scholars at public universities lay cl... more Much as journalist argue that they have a “right to know,” scholars at public universities lay claim to their “right to academic freedom.” In both cases, these “rights” carry little weight constitutionally. But, just how much protection is actually afforded to academics through the First Amendment? This article addresses this question in light of the convergence of two elements—the corporatization of public universities and the ruling in the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court case Garcetti v. Ceballos (which heavily suggests that public employee speech does not qualify for the same level of First Amendment protection as private citizen speech). Finally, this article proposes a solution to the current crises, a solution that includes creating a constitutionally protected category of speech for academic inquiry at state colleges and universities.
There is no way to overstate the severity of the problems related to social inequality today, and... more There is no way to overstate the severity of the problems related to social inequality today, and treatment of hate speech in the United States is problematic in light of these escalating tensions. Long-standing arguments that free speech serves as a societal pressure valve and that open speech leads to truth hold little sway when, 200 years later, hatred against groups based on their identities is still rampant and insidious. The concept of hate speech and the subsequent calls for possible restriction raise complicated issues. This article proposes a shift in emphasis from the negative protection of individual rights instead toward a more positive support of social equality. Utilizing Axel Honneth’s theory of recognition, this article develops a two-tiered framework for free speech analysis that will promote a strategy for combating hate speech in the global twenty-first century.
Journal of Applied Journalism & Media Studies, 2019
This article explores the collaborative exchange programme that both authors have been involved i... more This article explores the collaborative exchange programme that both authors have been involved in as the faculty supervisors for more than fifteen years. In this programme students from the US and Russian universities come together to write, design and produce a media project at each other’'s campuses. From working as an international team, students from both countries practice journalism skills and learn about different cultural and professional traditions, which cannot be reproduced in textbooks or classrooms. In the study, which includes survey responses from 61 former programme participants, the authors measure the success of the programme in two main areas: as a highly impactful study-abroad experience and its ability to foster collaboration and cooperation in journalism education across borders. Based on the responses to the survey, the authors were able to evaluate the long-lasting impact on the students who participate, indicating that during the process they gain not only valuable journalistic skills but also cross-cultural experiences that have a positive impact on their future careers.
... Page 8. viii Acknowledgments Forell. Most ... seriously. Finally, I owe the highest gratitude... more ... Page 8. viii Acknowledgments Forell. Most ... seriously. Finally, I owe the highest gratitude to Hannah Arnoske and Adrienne Ione. Hannah, your companionship and unconditional love throughout the writing of this book were immeasurable. ...
International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics, 2005
Well-known examples of how media owners manipulated coverage of the war during the first six mont... more Well-known examples of how media owners manipulated coverage of the war during the first six months include Cumulus Media's edict that its radio stations broadcast only pro-war stories; the firing of Peter Arnett by NBC because of one of his broadcasts from Iraq; and MSNBC's cancelling of the Phil Donahue Show because the network believed the show would be a conduit for the liberal anti-war agenda. Lesser-known examples of ownership interference in war-related coverage have occurred throughout the United States at smaller media outlets, where reporters have been fired, demoted, or otherwise reprimanded for participating in anti-war activities on their own time (FAIR 2003).
By protecting dissident speech, the First Amendment purports to offer a way for subordinate socia... more By protecting dissident speech, the First Amendment purports to offer a way for subordinate social groups to participate in political discourse, to hold and exercise power through communication. However, in recent years, legal scholars have begun to question the traditional principles inherent in First Amendment doctrine and the reliance by the Supreme Court on what could be considered an outdated idea of liberty. This article argues that individuals and groups are socially constructed and, as a result, current traditional liberal theory and its reliance on the autonomous individual fail to address societal power and speech's role in that power dynamic. Specifically, the article offers a new framework for free speech cases that would consider context-both historical and individual-in addition to in-place doctrinal tests.
Following Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush Administration began imposing every increasing limitations on ... more Following Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush Administration began imposing every increasing limitations on civil rights. One example is the implementation of free speech zones, a practice in which political dissidents are cordoned off from the President during public appearances. While these zones originated in the 1980s, the use of them has grown considerably in the past few years. Critics argue that moving protesters to a remote location during Presidential events gives the impression that there is no dissent. This paper explores the constitutionality of free speech zones, ultimately demonstrating the shortcomings of the true threats doctrine, a legal framework for analysis in cases dealing with speech that may be threatening. This article suggests an alternative framework for analysis that would 1) better balance national security interests with speech protection for political dissidents and 2) clear up some of the doctrinal confusion in the application of the true threats doctrine in general.
Journal of Technologies in Knowledge Sharing, 2015
The nature of academic freedom in the digital age now shifts and transforms as rapidly as the too... more The nature of academic freedom in the digital age now shifts and transforms as rapidly as the tools used to call it to question. This paper explores examples of U.S. institutions of higher education attempting to address the reach and implications of social media within the rights of academic expression, often with results antithetical to the notion of academic inquiry and rights held so dear in its production. We are entering a time when knowledge is increasingly socially and openly constructed. The creation of intellectual thought reaches (often resides) far outside the walls of the academy. If higher education is to continue serving as a respected creation center and collaborator in knowledge that serves society, one cannot discount the need to adapt to the tools and habits of shared and social knowledge. This paper explores the intersection of conflict for academic freedom and digital footprints. It puts forward a framework for the use of collaboration software in defining teaching and learning that is open, social and without walls.
Much as journalist argue that they have a “right to know,” scholars at public
universities lay cl... more Much as journalist argue that they have a “right to know,” scholars at public universities lay claim to their “right to academic freedom.” In both cases, these “rights” carry little weight constitutionally. But, just how much protection is actually afforded to academics through the First Amendment? This article addresses this question in light of the convergence of two elements—the corporatization of public universities and the ruling in the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court case Garcetti v. Ceballos (which heavily suggests that public employee speech does not qualify for the same level of First Amendment protection as private citizen speech). Finally, this article proposes a solution to the current crises, a solution that includes creating a constitutionally protected category of speech for academic inquiry at state colleges and universities.
Journal of Applied Journalism & Media Studies, 2019
This article explores the collaborative exchange programme that both authors have been involved i... more This article explores the collaborative exchange programme that both authors have been involved in as the faculty supervisors for more than fifteen years. In this programme students from the US and Russian universities come together to write, design and produce a media project at each other’'s campuses. From working as an international team, students from both countries practice journalism skills and learn about different cultural and professional traditions, which cannot be reproduced in textbooks or classrooms. In the study, which includes survey responses from 61 former programme participants, the authors measure the success of the programme in two main areas: as a highly impactful study-abroad experience and its ability to foster collaboration and cooperation in journalism education across borders. Based on the responses to the survey, the authors were able to evaluate the long-lasting impact on the students who participate, indicating that during the process they gain not only valuable journalistic skills but also cross-cultural experiences that have a positive impact on their future careers.
There is no way to overstate the severity of the problems related to
social inequality today, and... more There is no way to overstate the severity of the problems related to social inequality today, and treatment of hate speech in the United States is problematic in light of these escalating tensions. Longstanding arguments that free speech serves as a societal pressure valve and that open speech leads to truth hold little sway when, 200 years later, hatred against groups based on their identities is still rampant and insidious. The concept of hate speech and the subsequent calls for possible restriction raise complicated issues. This article proposes a shift in emphasis from the negative protection of individual rights instead toward a more positive support of social equality. Utilizing Axel Honneth’s theory of recognition, this article develops a two-tiered framework for free speech analysis that will promote a strategy for combating hate speech in the global twenty-first century.
Modern Power and Free Speech: Contemporary Culture and Issues of Equality, 2009
Modern Power and Free Speech explores the complicated relationship between the First Amendment an... more Modern Power and Free Speech explores the complicated relationship between the First Amendment and culturally disempowered and groups within the United States. By focusing on hate speech, Internet pornography, and political dissent, Chris Demaske analyzes First Amendment discourse and doctrine and questions the role of the concept of the autonomous individual. Demaske asserts that the presupposed equality of so-called 'autonomous individuals' does not exist and goes on to show how these specious claims to equality only serve to further silence those marginalized members of American society. Combining legal analysis, First Amendment theory, feminist theory, and political theory, Chris Demaske addresses the inadequacies of current free-speech doctrine and provides a possible solution to remedy them.
Uploads
Papers
it to question. This paper explores examples of U.S. institutions of higher education attempting to address the reach and
implications of social media within the rights of academic expression, often with results antithetical to the notion of
academic inquiry and rights held so dear in its production. We are entering a time when knowledge is increasingly socially
and openly constructed. The creation of intellectual thought reaches (often resides) far outside the walls of the academy. If
higher education is to continue serving as a respected creation center and collaborator in knowledge that serves society,
one cannot discount the need to adapt to the tools and habits of shared and social knowledge. This paper explores the
intersection of conflict for academic freedom and digital footprints. It puts forward a framework for the use of collaboration
software in defining teaching and learning that is open, social and without walls.
universities lay claim to their “right to academic freedom.” In both cases, these
“rights” carry little weight constitutionally. But, just how much protection is
actually afforded to academics through the First Amendment? This article
addresses this question in light of the convergence of two elements—the corporatization of public universities and the ruling in the 2006 U.S. Supreme
Court case Garcetti v. Ceballos (which heavily suggests that public employee
speech does not qualify for the same level of First Amendment protection as
private citizen speech). Finally, this article proposes a solution to the current
crises, a solution that includes creating a constitutionally protected category of
speech for academic inquiry at state colleges and universities.
social inequality today, and treatment of hate speech in the United
States is problematic in light of these escalating tensions. Longstanding
arguments that free speech serves as a societal pressure
valve and that open speech leads to truth hold little sway when, 200
years later, hatred against groups based on their identities is still
rampant and insidious. The concept of hate speech and the subsequent
calls for possible restriction raise complicated issues. This article
proposes a shift in emphasis from the negative protection of
individual rights instead toward a more positive support of social
equality. Utilizing Axel Honneth’s theory of recognition, this article
develops a two-tiered framework for free speech analysis that will
promote a strategy for combating hate speech in the global twenty-first
century.
Books
it to question. This paper explores examples of U.S. institutions of higher education attempting to address the reach and
implications of social media within the rights of academic expression, often with results antithetical to the notion of
academic inquiry and rights held so dear in its production. We are entering a time when knowledge is increasingly socially
and openly constructed. The creation of intellectual thought reaches (often resides) far outside the walls of the academy. If
higher education is to continue serving as a respected creation center and collaborator in knowledge that serves society,
one cannot discount the need to adapt to the tools and habits of shared and social knowledge. This paper explores the
intersection of conflict for academic freedom and digital footprints. It puts forward a framework for the use of collaboration
software in defining teaching and learning that is open, social and without walls.
universities lay claim to their “right to academic freedom.” In both cases, these
“rights” carry little weight constitutionally. But, just how much protection is
actually afforded to academics through the First Amendment? This article
addresses this question in light of the convergence of two elements—the corporatization of public universities and the ruling in the 2006 U.S. Supreme
Court case Garcetti v. Ceballos (which heavily suggests that public employee
speech does not qualify for the same level of First Amendment protection as
private citizen speech). Finally, this article proposes a solution to the current
crises, a solution that includes creating a constitutionally protected category of
speech for academic inquiry at state colleges and universities.
social inequality today, and treatment of hate speech in the United
States is problematic in light of these escalating tensions. Longstanding
arguments that free speech serves as a societal pressure
valve and that open speech leads to truth hold little sway when, 200
years later, hatred against groups based on their identities is still
rampant and insidious. The concept of hate speech and the subsequent
calls for possible restriction raise complicated issues. This article
proposes a shift in emphasis from the negative protection of
individual rights instead toward a more positive support of social
equality. Utilizing Axel Honneth’s theory of recognition, this article
develops a two-tiered framework for free speech analysis that will
promote a strategy for combating hate speech in the global twenty-first
century.