Freedom of communication in the U.S. and Europe
| Autor | Pedro J. Tenorio |
| Cargo | Professor of Constitutional Law. UNED |
| Páginas | 59-106 |
FREEDOM OF COMMUNICATION
IN THE U.S. AND EUROPE
PEDRO J. TENORIO
108 © UNED. Revista de Derecho Político
N.º 85, septiembre-diciembre 2012, págs. 59-106
SUMMARY
1. DIFFERENT DENSITY OF LAW IN THE UNITED STATES SUPRE-
ME COURT AND THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. 2.
DUALITY OF MODELS DERIVED FROM REGULATORY TEXTS. 3.
CONTRASTS OF SPECIFIC JUDGMENTS OF THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN
RIGHTS. 3.1. Neutrality vs. belligerent democracy. 3.2. Mature version of the
doctrine of «clear and present danger» and its absence in Europe. 3.3. Freedom
of the press as a fundamental freedom, and the press as watchdog. 4. SULLIVAN
AND LINGENS IN SPAIN. 5. FINAL COMMENTS.
Fecha recepción: 15.05.2012
Fecha aceptación: 23.07.2012
FREEDOM OF COMMUNICATION IN
THE U.S. AND EUROPE
PEDRO J. TENORIO
Professor of Constitutional Law. UNED
1. DIFFERENT DENSITY OF THE LAW IN THE UNITED STATES
SUPREME COURT AND THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN
RIGHTS
The subject of this article addresses freedom of communication in the juris-
prudence of the United States Supreme Court (hereafter referred to as USSC) and the
European Court of Human Rights (hereafter referred to as ECtHR). Our discussion
will attempt to compare the U.S. and Europe, from a juridical point of view1, in-
1On the need for expanded empirical investigation of the foundations of First Amendment
law, see Robert C. Entman,«Putting the First Amendment in its Place: Enhancing American De-
mocracy through the Press»,1993 U Chi Legal F 61; L.A. Powe, Jr.,«The Supreme Court, Social
Change, and Legal Scholarship», 44 Stan L Rev 1615 (1992). According to David A. Strauss,
«Rights and the System of Freedom of Expression», 1993 U Chi Legal F 197 1993, p. 197 and ff.,
we tend to frame questions about press regulation in such crude terms, because we lack the con-
ceptual and empirical tools to determine which of the many proposals for regulation of the press
is a good idea. The referred author considers that four possible empirical inquiries seem especially
appropriate. (1) What correlation is there between the views expressed in newspaper editorials, or
in the bias given to news stories in both print and broadcast media, and the views of various ac-
tors-such as owners, consumers (readers and viewers), and advertisers? [See C. Edwi n Baker,
«Advertising and a Democratic Press», 140U Pa L Rev 2097 (1992)]. (2) How independent of po-
litical influence has public broadcasting been? [See, generally, Public Television: A Program for Ac-
tion, The Report and Recommendations of the Carnegie Commission on Educational Television (Bantam Books,
1967)].(3) What have been the effects of FCC regulation of the broadcast me dia? The dual
system of regulation of the media in the U.S. has, in effect, conducted a natural experiment over
109
© UNED. Revista de Derecho Político
N.º 85, septiembre-diciembre 2012, págs. 59-106
Para continuar leyendo
Solicita tu prueba