Topic: Does The First Amendment Protect Advertisements? “Commercial Speech,” Also Known As Advertising, Is Protected By The 1st Amendment Of The U.S. Constitution. This Type Of Speech Enjoys Somewhat Less 1st Amendment Protection From Governmental Encroac
Outline
Thesis:
Advertising is a protected form of speech by the First Amendment. I will support the decision for the courts to regulate commercial speech as if it was unregulated the business practices could turn into an unethical form of expression. I will elaborate on the differences between commercial and non-commercial speech and why one is more federally regulated than another.
Introduction:
Factually state the First Amendment and how it protects commercial and non-commercial speech. Elude to how I will cover in the paper, the difference between the two, why I support the courts stricter form of commercial speech regulation.
Body:
Additionally, from above the paper will cover how some may disagree with my point of view, how I can refute or concede to those statements, yet still support why my thesis is the overwhelmingly correct position on the topic.
Conclusion:
I will work on tying together all the afore mentioned points and provide some commentary as to how I might envision regulation transpiring in the future due to advancements in technology/web 2.0 technologies and society in itself.
Synopsis
I have decided to cover in my paper the First Amendment and its protection, yet regulation, of commercial speech. Advertising has always intrigued me, and I think this is a wonderful opportunity to learn beyond the surface layer of marketing. I will support why I believe commercial speech should be protected, why it should be regulated more stringently over non-commercial and ultimately where the tweaking of regulation by the FTC may go in the future.
Works Cited:
Middleton, Kent, et al. The Law of Public Communication. Routledge, 2018.
Budzinski, Andrew C. “A Disclosure-Focused Approach to Compelled Commercial Speech.” Michigan Law Review, vol. 112, no. 7, May 2014, pp. 1305–1335. EBSCOhost, library.esc.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=96113507&site=eds-live.
“First Amendment — Commercial Speech — Second Circuit Holds That Prohibiting Truthful Off-Label Promotion of FDA-Approved Drugs by Pharmaceutical Representatives Violates First Amendment. — United States v. Caronia, 703 F.3d 149 (2d Cir. 2012).” Harvard Law Review, no. 2, 2013, p. 795. EBSCOhost, library.esc.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsjsr&AN=edsjsr.23742025&site=eds-live.
“CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – FIRST AMENDMENT – COMPELLED COMMERCIAL SPEECH – D.C. CIRCUIT HOLDS THAT FDA RULE MANDATING GRAPHIC WARNING IMAGES ON CIGARETTE PACKAGING AND ADVERTISEMENTS VIOLATES FIRST AMENDMENT. — R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Food & Drug Administration, 696 F. 3d 1205 (D.C. Cir. 2012).” Harvard Law Review, vol. 126, no. 3, Jan. 2013, pp. 818–825. EBSCOhost, library.esc.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=84740574&site=eds-live.
Myers, Cayce. “Full Length Article: What’s the Legal Definition of PR?: An Analysis of Commercial Speech and Public Relations.” Public Relations Review, vol. 42, Dec. 2016, pp. 821–831. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.10.005.
Bennigson, Tom. “Nike Revisited: Can Commercial Corporations Engage in Non-Commercial Speech?” Connecticut Law Review, no. 2, 2006, p. 379. EBSCOhost, library.esc.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsggo&AN=edsgcl.160559498&site=eds-live.
CEBULA, KERRI, and MARK DODDS. “Celebrity Endorsements and Congratulatory Messages: Jordan v. Jewel Food Stores: A Case of Right to Publicity versus Commercial Speech.” Journal of Brand Strategy, vol. 5, no. 1, Spring 2016, pp. 51–56. EBSCOhost, library.esc.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=116758326&site=eds-live.
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? Order now!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!
