Libel In News Of Congressional Investigating Committees

Libel: In News of Congressional Investigating Committees was first published in 1961. This is a study of a perplexing problem in libel law, that which is involved in the reporting of news of congressional investigating committees. The danger of committing libel is a constant threat to newsmen in their attempt at fair coverage of the activities of these committees. The responsible reporter faces the challenge of reporting such news as fully as the public interest demands while, at the same time, working in a situation of uncertainty as far as libel law is concerned. Professor Nelson seeks to cl.

Libel: In News of Congressional Investigating Committees was first published in 1961.This is a study of a perplexing problem in libel law, that which is involved in the reporting of news of congressional investigating committees. The danger of committing libel is a constant threat to newsmen in their attempt at fair coverage of the activities of these committees. The responsible reporter faces the challenge of reporting such news as fully as the public interest demands while, at the same time, working in a situation of uncertainty as far as libel law is concerned.Professor Nelson seeks to clarify some of the issues in the problem by a close examination of the proceedings of a single committee, the House Un-American Activities Committee. He also illustrates his discussion with examples from the proceedings of other committees, such as those of the McCarthy hearings.The basic question hinges on the concept of "qualified privilege," the legal protection of immunity from the libel findings in connection with the reporting of "official" proceedings. But which of the committee activities may be construed as official and which as unofficial, in the eyes of the law? This is the nub of the problem, and Professor Nelson's analysis will, it is hoped, throw light on a shadowy question.The book should prove useful and interesting to lawyers, government officials, and political scientists.

History tells us that World War II united Americans, but as in other conflicts it was soon back to politics as usual. Nancy Beck Young argues that the illusion of cooperative congressional behavior actually masked internecine party warfare over the New Deal. Young takes a close look at Congress during the most consensual war in American history to show how its members fought intense battles over issues ranging from economic regulation to social policies. Her book highlights the extent of-and reasons for-liberal successes and failures, while challenging assumptions that conservatives had gained control of legislative politics by the early 1940s. It focuses on the role of moderates in modern American politics, arguing that they, not conservatives, determined the outcomes in key policy debates and also established the methods for liberal reform that would dominate national politics until the early 1970s. Why We Fight--which refers as much to the conflicts between lawmakers as to war propaganda films of Frank Capra—unravels the tangle of congressional politics, governance, and policy formation in what was the defining decade of the twentieth century. It demonstrates the fragility of wartime liberalism, the nuances of partisanship, and the reasons for a bifurcated record on economic and social justice policy, revealing difficulties in passing necessary wartime measures while exposing racial conservatism too powerful for the moderate-liberal coalition to overcome. Young shows that scaling back on certain domestic reforms was an essential compromise liberals and moderates made in order to institutionalize the New Deal economic order. Some programs were rejected-including the Civilian Conservation Corps, the National Youth Administration, and the Works Progress Administration—while others like the Wagner Act and economic regulation were institutionalized. But on other issues, such as refugee policy, racial discrimination, and hunting communist spies, the discord proved insurmountable. This wartime political dynamic established the dominant patterns for national politics through the remainder of the century. Impeccably researched, Young's study shows that we cannot fully appreciate the nuances of American politics after World War II without careful explication of how the legislative branch redefined the New Deal in the decade following its creation.

Makers of the Media Mind is a collection of analytical essays focusing on the most important and original ideas contributed to the field of mass communication by journalism educators. Divided into six sections representing the most prominent areas of specialization in the field, this text serves two significant purposes: first, it acquaints readers with the lives of preeminent journalism educators; second, it provides concise discussions and evaluations of the most compelling ideas those educators have to offer. The editor of, and contributors to, this text contend that ideas cannot be appreciated fully without an understanding of the creators of those same ideas. They hope that this volume's coverage of "creators" as well as concepts will demonstrate that journalism education has played a critical role in the making of the "media mind."

A guide for conducting research involving both legal and communication questions. It shows communication law scholars how to make use of the methodologies employed in communication science. It addresses topics such as reconciling communication and law, social research approaches to libel and theories pertaining to freedom of expression.

Law of Mass Communications: Freedom & Control of Print & Broadcast Media examines the legal implications of changes in media systems & services wherever they occur. It both traces communications law issues to their sources & considers their future directions. The text reviews the historical & constitutional foundations of free expression, & the implications of mass communications law for the citizen. It explores the governmental regulation of broadcasting, new media, advertising & copyright. It discusses citizens' rights with regard to fact-gathering. And it surveys the ongoing consolidation & globalization of the mass media & the means by which communications are distributed.