 |
Midterm #2 - J385 - Winter 2002 |
|
Five questions, each worth 14 points (total of 70 points)
|
|
Midterm #2 - J385 - Winter 2002 |
|
Five questions, each worth 14 points (total of 70 points)
|
1 / 2. Tommy Tre is a former member of the UO basketball team. During
his years on the basketball team (1988-92) he was named to the
"All PAC-10" team three times and was a second-team All-American
selection as a senior. Tre was a sixth round draft choice in
the NBA and played for three teams before retiring in 1998. He
returned to Eugene where he finished the last 15 credits for
a degree in Journalism: Public Relations. He is now a partner
in a Tre & Associates, a Portland-based PR firm.
In 2000, Tre's firm was hired by "Pay Athletes Now!" (PAN), a
group working to change current NCAA rules regarding payment
to college athletes. As part of the contract with PAN, Tre became
a primary spokesperson for the group. He gives speeches, attends
events and writes op-ed pieces in support of PAN's position on
the issue. PAN's strategy is to attack the NCAA at every opportunity
and to attempt to organize current college athletes in support
of PAN's position.
In March 2001, the Eugene Gazette published an op-ed article
written by Rebecca Rule, a UCLA faculty member and a member of
the NCAA committee reviewing the current regulations governing
payment to athletes. Her article contained the following paragraphs:
It is unfortunate that Tommy Tre has become the leading spokesperson
for PAN. Tommy was a great basketball player during his years
at Oregon, but his current role is damaging his reputation. PAN's
campaign contains a number of distortions of the facts and does
a disservice to college athletes.
College athletes are students first and athletes second. The
current NCAA regulations recognize this fact. If we were to pay
athletes it would simply move us further away from the ideal
of the student athlete. If Tre had ever finished his college
education, he might have a greater appreciation for the "student"
part of "student athlete."
This issue will never be resolved as long as Tre and PAN are
involved. They are in it for the money and should step aside
and let those of us who really care about college athletics find
the best solution.
1. Tre sues Rule and the Gazette for libel after both refused
his request for a retraction. The defendants claim that Tre is
a limited public figure under Oregon law. Tre claims he is a
private person. Is Tre a private person or a limited public figure?
EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWER.
2. Tre claims that he has been defamed by the following statements:
The defendants claim that none of the statements are defamatory.
Should any be defamatory, they are: (1) true; or (2) protected
opinion. Are the statements defamatory? Will the defendants'
asserted defenses be successful? EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWER.
3. The First Amendment severely limits the power of government to
deny media access to accident scenes and combat zones. True or False? EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWER.
4. In 1999, the federal Food and Drug Administration issues a report
on alternative treatments for heart disease. The report continues
to be available on FDA's website. In December 2001, researchers
for a biotech firm filed a FOIA request for "3000 pages of supporting
materials used in writing the 1999 report on heart disease."
The researchers had seen references to the supporting material
in the 1999 report. In response the FDA wrote: "We are sorry,
but the requested materials are not a public record. While the
agency did pay for that material, it was returned to the contracting
consulting firm shortly after the study was published."
The researchers are considering an appeal of the denial of access
to the supporting materials. Is it likely that an appeal will
succeed? YES or NO? EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWER.
5. The Dean of the UO School of Journalism and Communication (SOJC)
has appointed an advisory committee, the Committee for the Future
(CFF), to study the future of the SOJC. The committee includes
School faculty and staff, alumni and media professionals. The
committee has scheduled a series of meetings during the 2001-02
academic year.
When several SOJC students discover that no public notice is
being provided, they protest the lack of notice and demand the
right to attend the meetings. The chair of the committee informed
them that the meetings are closed to the public. The students
believe the committee is meeting in violation of the Oregon Public
Meetings Law.
Is CFF violating the Oregon Public Meetings Law? YES or NO? EXPLAIN
YOUR ANSWER.
