{"id":1222,"date":"2015-10-14T17:36:03","date_gmt":"2015-10-14T17:36:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/?page_id=1222"},"modified":"2022-12-01T13:54:21","modified_gmt":"2022-12-01T13:54:21","slug":"exam-review","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/exam-review\/","title":{"rendered":"Exam reviews"},"content":{"rendered":"

Your exams:\u00a0 Time, Place and Manner\u00a0\u00a0<\/b><\/span><\/p>\r\n

Since the spring of 2020, all tests and exams are open-book and online with a larger proportion of written questions. <\/em><\/p>\r\n

The mid-term exam has two parts:\u00a0 \u00a0 <\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\r\n

I: An essay section<\/strong> with libel and\/ or privacy questions and other key points you should know from basic constitutional law and libel law, for example the six elements of the First Amendment, the five elements of libel, the three major defenses against libel, etc.<\/p>\r\n

II: A general section<\/strong> with 40 to 50 matching questions\u00a0 about the structure of the courts, jurisprudence, constitutional law, legal terms, prior restraint, libel, privacy and ethics.<\/p>\r\n

The final exam has four parts: \u00a0<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\r\n

I: Written response <\/strong>questions about elements of the First Amendment; international law; the right to dissent; ethical traditions; the Sullivan standard; and major principles of civics and democracy.\u00a0<\/p>\r\n

II: General matching <\/strong>questions about cases and people in areas of prior restraint, libel, privacy, copyright, obscenity and ethics<\/p>\r\n

III: A professional section<\/strong> with matching questions about the law and regulation of advertising,\u00a0 broadcasting, anti-trust and news-gathering\u00a0<\/p>\r\n

IV: Essay Section: \u00a0<\/strong>Extra credit written response essay questions on contemporary issues such as Section 230 or social media censorship.<\/p>\r\n

\r\n

\u00a0What do you need to know?\u00a0 Legal basics\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\r\n

Concepts & Term<\/span>s — Equal justice, due process, constitutionality, stare decisis<\/em>, federal supremacy and incorporation of Bill of Rights, hierarchy of protected speech; Also certiorari, diversity jurisdiction, demurrer, \u00a0dissent, motion for summary judgement, opinion, overturn, remand, tort, venue, voir dire,\u00a0<\/p>\r\n

Constitutional test<\/span>s — strict scrutiny, intermediate scrutiny, rational basis review, over breadth, forum analysis, Miller test (obscenity),\u00a0 Sullivan actual malice standard.\u00a0 (For final also include: Central Hudson (intermedia scrutiny) test, Lehman rule (ads in public media),\u00a0<\/p>\r\n

Legal institutions<\/span> — Common law systems versus civil law systems,\u00a0 structure of courts, five sources of law, \u00a0civil versus criminal law, elements of media law, content issues versus structural issues,<\/p>\r\n

Cases and Laws\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0 — You should be able to match all cases on this list <\/span><\/a>with descriptions, and all laws and treaties on this list <\/a><\/span>with their descriptions as well.<\/p>\r\n

For the mid term,<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong> you should know all the cases and trends in history, prior restraint, obscenity,\u00a0 libel, and privacy\u00a0<\/p>\r\n

Prior restraint<\/strong> — \u00a0Schenck v US, Near v Minnesota, Whitney v California, Brandenburg v Ohio, \u00a0New York Times v US,\u00a0 Holder v Humanitarian Law Project,<\/p>\r\n

Also: Understand the shift in tests for prior restraint from “bad tendency” to “clear & present danger” to “imminent action”
Also dissent, flag burning, terrorism, hate speech and compelled speech cases<\/p>\r\n

Obscenity & Indecency — <\/strong>Hicklin rule, \u00a0Comstock Laws, \u00a0Ulysses case, Roth v US, Ginzburg case, Miller v California, Pope v Illinois.<\/p>\r\n

Also changing tests for obscenity from Hicklin to Roth to Miller.<\/p>\r\n

Libel <\/strong>— Cherry v Des Moines Leader, New York Times v Sullivan,\u00a0AP v Walker, Curtis v Butts, Texas Beef Group v Oprah Winfree \/\/ Burden of proof on plaintiff; \u00a0Fault\u00a0\u00a0for public figure is\u00a0actual malice as defined in cases after NYT v Sullivan<\/p>\r\n

Also five elements of libel and three main defenses
Also definition of actual malice
Also veggie libel and SLAPP suits
Also be able to comment on a libel hypothetical<\/p>\r\n

Privacy<\/strong>\u00a0— \u00a0Legal and ethical issues concerning crime victims and witnesses; Cox v Cohen, Smith v Daily Mail,\u00a0Sherrod v Brietbart, \u00a0 Sipple v Chronicle Publishing, Bolea v Gawker<\/p>\r\n

Also five privacy torts (Prosser’s four torts, Virginia’s Intentional Infliction tort)
Also three defenses in privacy lawsuits
Why “intentional infliction of emotional distress” is not a form of libel;
Also: what ethical issues are involved with the identification of crime victims and other sorts of private facts.
Also be able to comment on a privacy hypothetica\u00a0<\/p>\r\n

Ethics<\/strong> —\u00a0Be prepared to apply civil traditions and professional codes to an ethical problem.<\/p>\r\n