Parties: Ark. Educ. Tv Comm'n v. Forbes
Date: 1998-05-18
Identifiers:
Opinions:
Segment Sets:
Paragraph: 34 - Were it faced with the prospect of cacophony, on the one hand, and First Amendment liability, on the other, a public television broadcaster might choose not to air candidates' views at all. A broadcaster might decide N206* "'the safe course is to avoid controversy,' . . . N207* and by so doing diminish the free flow of information and ideas.'' Turner Broadcasting System, Inc., 512 U.S., at 656, 114 S.Ct., at 2466 (quoting Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo, 418 U.S. 241, 257, 94 S.Ct. 2831, 2839, 41 L.Ed.2d 730 (1974)). In this circumstance, a N208* " [g]overnment-enforced right of access inescapably "dampens the vigor and limits the variety of public debate.'''
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: enforced right of access inescapably "dampens
Search time: 2018-03-15 12:38:56 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef Segmenter: ars9ef
Paragraph: 14 - When a public broadcaster exercises editorial discretion in the selection and presentation of its programming, it engages in speech activity. Cf.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: engages in speech activity. Cf
Search time: 2017-11-10 14:59:38 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 14 - Although programming decisions often involve the compilation of the speech of third parties, the decisions nonetheless constitute communicative acts.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: of the speech of third parties
Search time: 2017-11-10 14:59:38 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk