SUPREME COURT HANDS MEDIA 1ST AMENDMENT VICTORY

By: Todd Shields Case Involved Illegal Tape Recording Of Phone Call


The U.S. Supreme Court handed journalists a limited First
Amendment victory Monday, ruling that the media cannot be
punished for publishing important information that others may
have obtained illegally.

In a 6-to-3 vote, the court said free speech considerations meant
a Pennsylvania radio station could not be sued for broadcasting a
tape recording of a telephone conversation that was meant to
remain private. Dissenting justices cited concerns over privacy
in electronic communications.

First Amendment advocates said the case was important because it
had the potential to affect common journalistic practices,
including the publication in newspapers of leaked government and
corporate documents.

The case concerned broadcaster Frederick Vopper's 1993 airing of
a cellular telephone conversation between two union officials.
One of the officials seemed to threaten violence amid
negotiations over teachers' salaries. Vopper got the recording by
a circuitous route.

Somebody -- the person still has not been publicly identified --
recorded the call, and a person who said he found the tape in his
mail box gave it to Vopper, who in turn used it on his public
affairs program on stations WILK and WGBI. The union officials
sued Vopper.

In today's decision, the majority said they had weighed privacy
rights against the need for free debate about public affairs.
"Privacy rights give way when balanced against the interest in
publishing matters of public importance," Justice John Paul
Stevens wrote for the majority. He wrote that a stranger's
illegal conduct -- the recording of the cell phone call -- did
not remove the First Amendment shield from speech about a matter
of public concern.

In a separate concurring opinion, Justices Stephen Breyer and
Sandra Day O'Connor said the decision should not be interpreted
too broadly.

Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and
Clarence Thomas dissented, citing a right to be free from
"surreptitious eavesdropping."

A number of news organizations published briefs asserting
Vopper's rights to use the recording. They included The
Associated Press and the publishers of USA Today, The
Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times,
the Chicago Tribune, and other papers.



Todd Shields (tshields@editorandpublisher.com) is the Washington editor for E&P.



Copyright 2001, Editor & Publisher.