Pushing Democracy: Content-Based Regulations of the Press in Campaign Finance Law
During the last few election cycles, it has become something of a cliché to bemoan the dismal state of campaign coverage in mainstream news media. While political advertising and skewed public perceptions undoubtedly share some of the blame for this dissatisfaction, the state of media coverage itself is far from encouraging. Content analyses of media coverage in recent federal elections indicate that a stark minority of information reaching the public concerns substantive policy issues; an even smaller percentage is geared towards helping voters understand how campaign developments impact them personally. More disturbing still is the degree to which voters in these elections have misunderstood the candidates’ actual policy positions, a fact for which the media must bear some responsibility. These problems are of paramount importance, since they affect the successful functioning of American democracy. While most would agree that the optimal solution is to allow the press to self-correct, changes in the geopolitical landscape—such as the War on Terror—which might have precipitated this sort of self-correction by forcing the press to reexamine its role, have largely failed to do so. This note explores the extent to which external regulations requiring the institutional press to carry specific election-related content might be justified, and whether such regulations could withstand a First Amendment challenge.
