1
COM 365/665- Journalists, the Courts, and the Law – Winter 12-13
Instructor: Ron Bishop, Ph.D.
Office: PSA Building, Room 324
Office Hours:T and TH from 12:30-2, or call or email to set up a time to meet. .
Office Phone:215-895-1823
Class Location:Peck Problem Solving and Research Center 108
Email:
Class FB Page:
Listed among my groups as “Drexel JC&L Winter 12-13”
Ron’s Website:.
On Twitter:@rcbsam
Course Objectives
We have two: To learn the ins and outs of covering the court system enough to produce solid reporting on ongoing cases and to explore how past and recent federal and state court decisions have reshaped how journalists do their jobs.
Text and Readings
Alexander, S.L. (2003). Covering the Courts: A Handbook for Journalists. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Online readings, handouts, and videos (delivered via email or link to our Facebook page), will be distributed as we go. Please note – and don’t worry, I’ll remind you – that these are fair game for the quizzes.
Projects
News Stories
You will write two news stories, the first on a civil case (due week 4), the second on a criminal case (due week 8).
You can write your story about any stage in the case. Begin by visiting (preferably in person, but an online visit will do) the courthouse of your choice –federal, state, or local. Search the docket, find a case that interests you, and start digging.
You can also contact an attorney directly about a case he or she is working on. Please make sure that you indicate in your story the origin of the information and documents you’ve obtained.
Your stories must include comments from the attorneys for the parties in the case, obtained via phone, email, or in-person interviews. If an attorney or party doesn’t get back to you (after more than one try), or refuses to comment about the case, use that in your story. I encourage you to attend an actual hearing or trial. Such a visit will lend a great deal of color and impact to your stories.
Story submissions should also include photos and video, audio files taken from interviews, and links to documents and related information.
Critical Analysis
Here, you will research and write a 6-8 page critical analysis of a current news media-related case. We will talk about where to find these cases in class, but a good place to start is the website of Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press ( Please don’t simply rehash RCFP’s case stories; explore and gather your own information.
Your analysis must include a complete description of the facts of the case, the nature of the dispute, the major arguments, precedent (more on that in class), along with all relevant court rulings. You must also obtain (in person, via email, or by phone) comments from at least one of the attorneys or parties involved in the case or an individual qualified to comment on it.
You may use comments that have appeared in other publications, but they must be appropriately cited (as in, “Bishop’s attorney told The New York Times that he was exercising his constitutional right to dissent when he held up a “Give Peas a Chance” sign at the recent “Patriots Eat Only Carrots” rally…”).
Perhaps most important, though, is your take on the case. Did the courts correctly assess the facts and apply the law, in your view? If you believe the court erred, how should it have ruled? Where do you stand on the major issues in the case? What does the ruling (or rulings) mean for the day-to-day practice of journalism?
Your analysis is due Week 8.
Oral Arguments
During the first few weeks of class, I will divide you into four teams of five (or thereabouts). I will provide the teams with a (two teams get one question, two teams get the other) hypothetical legal question that you will research thoroughly, drawing on recent court decisions, recently passed or pending legislation, and existing regulatory policies.
Then the fun part: your team will prepare an oral argument to be delivered in the Earle Mack School of Law’s moot court room during the last week of the term, with me and the rest of your colleagues serving as judge and jury. You will be graded on depth of preparation, nimbleness of argument, and your ability to get the crowd rocking on the issues at hand. An LED projector will be available should you choose to develop a PowerPoint presentation or other visual aids.
Oral arguments will take place during our final exam period. If anyone knows where I can purchase a judge’s robe cheap, I’m all ears (that’s close to being true, actually).
Analysis of News Media Coverage (for our graduate student friends only)
You will write an 8-10 page paper (or comparable video essay) comparing the coverage of a high-profile (non media-related) case by two or more news organizations (print, online, television, radio). This will require you to search our library databases to pull articles on the case (unless you're like me and keep clipping articles until you can’t remember what you clipped them for).
It can be a state or federal case, local or national. I know what you're thinking: I'll analyze coverage of the Wikileaks controversy! I’ll check in with Bernie Madoff! Well, be warned that there are literally hundreds of articles out there on these cases. Choose wisely.
Use roughly two weeks worth (or between 10-20 stories) for your analysis, from any stage in the case. You can download the stories and view them on your PC or print them out – that’s your call. I find it easier to make notes on actual copies, but the “track changes” function in Word has become my friend. Either way, I would like to see copies of the stories (or their URL’s) with your final paper.
Here’s what you’ll be analyzing:
The balance, fairness, and objectivity in the coverage, the use of sources (who have the reporters talked to? Not talked to? Who is overrepresented? Underrepresented?), language (word choice, use of legal terms), knowledge of the law (is the case, case law, and legal precedent explained thoroughly?).
You must cite examples from the stories to support your arguments – for example, you can’t just say “the coverage was lewd and sensational” without backing it up.
The final paper is due at the end of Week 10.
Case Reactions
You’ll find a list of relevant court cases tied to each week’s class discussion. Don’t panic: it’s not a big deal if you can’t read all of them. What I ask of you is this: read one or two decisions all the way through (more if time permits) and at least one of the readings. Then complete a one-page analysis/reaction to one of the decisions based on these questions: Was the court correct in its decision? Was its reasoning sound? How would I have ruled? How does the decision play out in the real world of journalism? Use the readings as supporting material.
Please post your reactions to our Facebook page.
Mini-Projects
During the first five weeks of class, I will present some fact patterns and court documents – from both civil and criminal cases - from which you will write short (one-page) news stories. For Week 2, for example, you’ll watch an episode of your favorite TV courtroom show (Judge Judy, the People’s Court) and write about a case (without using the world “ridiculous,” a warning which will make sense if you watch Judge Judy for the mini-project).
I will also ask you to complete at least one short interview with a reporter who has covered or is covering a current case, or who has experience with filing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. You will write a one-page story about your conversation.
More on the mini-projects after our journey gets underway.
Policies
Attendance
It's vital that you be here to talk about story strategies and the legal issues that impact the craft of reporting. I'll take attendance and start penalizing folks only if absences become a problem. If you have to miss a session, please call or email me as much in advance as possible. You will be responsible for obtaining missed notes, although I’ll help there when I can too.
Drop Policy
Remember that you have until the end of Week 6 to drop the class. Please let me know
if you have questions or concerns about the class, the material, or our discussions.
Equipment
Please feel free to bring your laptops and Smartphones to class. I’m not in the rather nasty habit of tossing folks who surf while I’m talking and we’re discussing, but do me a favor: keep the surfing class-related as much as possible.
Digital video and still cameras and digital tape recorders are available from the fine folks at Drexel IMS () for use in the compilation of your stories. Please don’t wait to the last minute to reserve a piece of equipment.
Facebook Page
I’ve set up a Facebook page for us that will serve as a kind of clearinghouse for stories, case and reading reactions, videos, ideas, websites – anything related to the class that you would like to post. Deadline reminders also will be posted there.
I encourage you to post your stories to the page in addition to submitting them to me. It is my hope that the page will become a kind of news vehicle for us. You must still officially submit copies of your stories and projects, however. I also encourage you to post comments about the stories that appear – but be courteous, kind, and forgiving, as Steve Martin once said in a comedy routine that only old farts like me remember.
Folks With Disabilities
I’ll do all I can to help you – just let me take a look at your current accommodation verification letter (AVL) during the first week of class. Drexel’s Office of Disability Services (ODS) issues AVLs. For more information, contact ODS at or by phone at 215-895-1401 or 215-895-2299 (TTY).
Grading
I work (as always) with a 100-point scale: the critical analysis and case presentations are each worth 20 points, the news stories 15 points each, the short research paper (that goes with the case presentation) 10 points, the quizzes five points each, and the mini-projects two points each. With Drexel’s plus-minus grading system now firmly in place, this means that:
98-100 = A+94-97 = A90-93 + A-
87-89 = B+83-86 = B80-82 = B-
77-79 = C+ 73-76 = C70-72 = C-
67-69 = D+63-66 = D60-62 = D-
Below 60 = F
Plagiarism
Rather than continue the overheated and largely needless debate on this issue, let’s try this: If I discover that you’ve used someone else’s work without proper attribution, you will receive no points for that project, and will be in danger of failing the course. But I won’t immediately march you off for a meeting with the Judicial Affairs folks – we’ll talk first and try to remedy the situation should one occur.
Portfolios
Once a story is handed in, I will make comments (both in class and on the paper itself via
the “Track Changes” function of Word that I’ve only recently mastered) and give you a
grade. You will then have the chance to revise the story and earn additional points.
Submit your portfolio of the news stories (initial and revised versions) by Monday of final exam weekas a single document, a pdf, or in hard copy form.
Quizzes
We will have two quizzes on the cases and issues we discuss in class. The first will be distributed via email on week 5, the second during week 9. Questions will be drawn from the readings (both the book and online varieties) and from our class discussions. Please, please, please carefully take notes during the discussions.
Rough Drafts
Please feel free to send along rough drafts of your work. I will get comments back to you via email as soon as humanly possible.
Sources of Information and Guidance
American Law Sources Online – an amazing source of information on the courts and law in all 50 states. Includes links to courts at all levels, state constitutions, legislation, court rules, and laws.
The website for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.
The Legal Information Institute – an incredibly in-depth and helpful non-profit site run by the fine folks at Cornell University Law School.
Martindale-Hubbell – the best known (and best) national directory of lawyers.
National Center for State Courts – One-stop shopping for state court information; it features a comprehensive listing of all courts, and a court structure page.
The New Jersey state courts website.
Nolo – a legal information site created by two Bay Area lawyers who worked with low income families in the 1960’s. The site’s creators are “passionate about making the law accessible to everyone.”
The Oyez Project – the Supreme Court with a multimedia twist. Decisions, oral argument recordings, abstracts, and transcripts.
PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) – an electronic public access service that allows you to obtain case and docket information from federal courts.
NOTE: PACER requires that you register and set up an account with a credit or debit card. However, only a temporary authorization of $1 is made when you register. Documents cost 8 cents per page. You do not have to register for PACER in order to finish the work for this class.
The Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals website.
The official U.S. Supreme Court website.
The website for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
The Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania website (includes state supreme, superior, commonwealth, and common pleas courts).
United States Courts – Information and statistics on federal district courts and U.S. Courts of Appeal.
And from the journalism side…
Assignment Editor – Bills itself as the “newsroom home page.” Should be consulted repeatedly by any working reporter. Actually, it should be your home page. Created and maintained by Jim Lichtenstein, a managing editor at WBBM-TV in Chicago.
– run by the IRE (Investigative Reporters and Editors) – a compilation of helpful sources. Check out “Reporter’s Desktop.”
Journalism Resources at the University of Iowa – maintained by Karla Tonella.
The Poynter Institute – just because.
Student Press Law Center – a tireless advocate for First Amendment rights. Assists “students and teachers whose futures are in jeopardy because they refuse to back down in the face of unlawful censorship.”
And finally, some very important human being-type sources:
Cathie Abookire (ah-boo-kyre), Director of Communications for PA State Senator Lawrence Farnese; formerly Director of Communications for Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office. Reach Cathie by phone at 215-952-3121 or by email at .
Tom Clewley, Administrative Services Manager for the U.S. District Court in Philadelphia. He can be reached by email at or by phone at 267-299-7036.
Patty Hartman, Public Affairs Specialist, U.S. Attorney’s Office, U.S. District Court in Philadelphia. Reach Patty by email at or by phone at 215-861-8525.
Tasha Jamerson, Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office. Reach her by phone at 215-686-8711 or by email at .
Submissions
Submit all of your work to me via email (as Word attachments). I will combine the mini-projects and stories in a single document and send comments (but not grades) back to the group. Use the comments as a guide for your revisions.
Please double-space and paginate your work.
Discussion/Reading Schedule
Before we begin: Much like the U.S. Constitution, this is a living document, a work in progress, a road map. These topics will pop up often throughout our journey. Changes and deviations are likely – nay, inevitable – but we’ll make them together.
Week 1: Revisiting the First Amendment; it’s one thing to have it; it’s another thing entirely for the courts to intervene on its behalf. The at times murky world of prior restraint.
Are journalists under siege?
An introduction to the judicial system. Tools for covering the courts.
Reading a case caption; the relationship between reporters and attorneys.
Readings: Alexander, chapters 1, 2, and 10; excerpt from Fred Friendly’s Minnesota Rag (rcbsam.com); excerpt from Floyd Abrams, Speaking Freely (rcbsam.com).
Cases: Patterson v. Colorado, 205 U.S. 454 (1907); Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931); Grosjean v. American Press Co., 297 U.S. 233 (1936); New York Times v. U.S., 403 U.S. 713 (1971); U.S. v. The Progressive, 467 F. Supp. 990 (1979); Rice v. Paladin Enterprises, 128 F. 3d 233 (1997).
Weeks 2-3: How changes in the law have affected newsgathering: FOIA, Sunshine Laws, gag orders, the need for a federal Shield Law.
Protecting sources – how far do you go? Guarantees of anonymity.