Offensive speech and the captive audience. To what extent can government officials punish “offensive speech” because of the presence of a “captive audience”?
PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Offensive speech and the captive audience' - lyle
An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
To what extent can government officials punish “offensive speech” because of the presence of a “captive audience”?
Cohen v. California – recognizes that the presence of a captive audience may justify regulating speech BUT also notes that it is rare to find such audiences
Govt’s ability “to shut off discourse solely to protect others from hearing it is . . . dependent upon a showing that substantial privacy interests are being invaded in an essentially intolerable manner.”
Where are audiences “captive” – i.e., when is privacy invaded?
At a WVU basketball game against Ohio State, the students (largely led by a school sponsored organization) could be heard audibly shouting profanity at the opposing team in order to “get into the head” of their star player. This profanity from the student section has become an increasing trend at WVU games and has become so loud that it can be heard during televised broadcasts of the game. Despite school official’s pleas to tone down the profanity, students continue to use it during games.
Could the school enact a policy punishing students using profanity at games, claiming it was justified by the captive audience doctrine?
How is this situation different from the sound trucks situation and does it matter? Is it different from Cohen?