About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

103 Dick. L. Rev. 59 (1998-1999)
Circumventing Sullivan: An Argument against Awarding Punitive Damages for Newsgathering Torts

handle is hein.journals/dlr103 and id is 69 raw text is: Circumventing Sullivan: An Argument Against Awarding Punitive Damages for Newsgathering Torts Tracy Dreispul* [Wjithout some protection for seeking out the news, freedom of the press could be eviscerated.1 The United States Supreme Court has recognized that seeking out the news warrants First Amendment protection.2 However, the Court has never defined what First Amendment protections apply to newsgathering or how broadly these protections extend. In cases in which the press has sought protection for newsgathering, the United States Supreme Court has instead rested on the proposition that generally applicable laws do not violate the First Amendment simply because they burden the press's ability to seek out and gather the news.3 This conflict recently gained national attention in the case of Food Lion, Inc. v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc.4 I. Food Lion, Inc. v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc. In 1992, Lynne Litt and Susan Barnett, two producers of ABC's PrimeTime Live news program, used false identities and falsified employment applications in order to obtain employment at separate Food Lion grocery stores.' Litt and Barnett sought information for a news story on reputed unsanitary practices by * The author would like to thank Dr. Bill Chamberlin and Angela Izzo-Peppe for their assistance with this Article. 1. Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 681 (1972). 2. Id. at 681 (We do not question the significance of free speech, press, or assembly to the country's welfare. Nor is it suggested that newsgathering does not qualify for First Amendment protection; without some protection for seeking out the news, freedom of the press could be eviscerated.); see also Smith v. Daily Mail Publishing Co., 443 U.S. 97, 103 (1979) (offering protection for routine newspaper reporting techniques). 3. See, e.g., Cohen v. Cowles Media Co., 501 U.S. 663 (1991); Branzburg, 408 U.S. 665. 4. 887 F. Supp. 811 (M.D.N.C. 1995). 5. See id. at 816.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most