25th Annual IPLJ Symposium
Friday, February 9, 2018
9:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.
Fordham University
McNally Amphitheater
140 W. 62nd Street
New York City
Register here
***REGISTRATION WILL END at 9:00 PM EST on Wednesday, February 7. For late registrations, please email fordhamiplj@gmail.com.***
This year, IPLJ will focus on the values underlying our commitment to free speech, and the need to balance this fundamental right with civility and respect for human welfare. Our Symposium will examine the impact of freedom of expression on the media, and recent legal developments that test the boundaries of these protections. We will present a series of panel discussions on legal issues including: (1) European Union Comparative Law, (2) The Death of Political Neutrality in media organizations, and (3) Safeguarding Information Integrity in the Era of Fake News. IPLJ is dedicated to creating an open and vibrant forum for students to discuss such vital democratic principles, and we would hope that you will join us for the 25th annual Symposium.
Schedule of Events
8:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Check-In and Coffee
9:00 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. Safeguarding Information Integrity in the Era of Fake News
- Moderated by Professor Oliver Sylvain, Fordham University School of Law
- Sally Hubbard – The Capitol Forum, Senior Editor; Women Killing It! Podcast, Creator and Host
- Jeremy Chase – Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Senior Associate
- Matthew Schafer – Buzzfeed, Newsroom Counsel
The promulgation of fake news raises important legal issues regarding non-press media entities, social media platforms, and online content providers. This panel will address the recent boom in fabricated online news, despite the fact that free speech and free press protections are limited to the truth. Suggested topics include: How do we regulate those who are not held accountable to the same legal standards as the press, or restrict the mediums in which fake news can be disseminated? What would be the consequences of such a requirement, and how would this be policed?
10:15 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. Break
10:30 a.m. to 11:45 a.m. European Union Comparative Law
- Moderated by Professor Martin Flaherty, Fordham University School of Law; Co-Director, Leitner Center for International Law and Justice
- Nico Van Eijk – University of Amsterdam, Professor of Media and Telecommunications Law; The Institute for Information Law, Director
- Carrie DeCell – The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, Staff Attorney
11:45 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Dean Matthew Diller’s Remarks
12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. Lunch
1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. Keynote Conversation
- Moderated by Professor Cameron N. Russell, Fordham University School of Law; Executive Director, Fordham Center on Law and Information Policy
- David Bralow – Press Freedom Defense Fund, Legal Director; First Look Media, First Amendment Counsel
- James Risen – Two-Time Pulitzer Prize Winning Journalist; First Look Media’s Press Freedom Defense Fund, Director
- Daniel Jacobson – Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Associate; Former White House Associate Counsel
2:00 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. Break
2:15 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. Political Non-Neutrality in the Press
- Moderated by Professor Corey Brettschneider, Fordham University School of Law
- Susan Buckley – Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP, First Amendment Senior Counsel
- Mark Conrad – Fordham University Gabelli School of Business, Associate Professor
This panel will discuss the deficiency of presenting multiple viewpoints in the press. As news organizations become more polarized, it appears the public grows more and more polarized as well. The Fairness Doctrine, introduced in 1949, required the presentation of news and public issues in a neutral way by requiring representation of multiple opinions or viewpoints of an issue. While this doctrine was limited to broadcast, this panel will explore how a similar requirement could apply across all press organizations. We will discuss if this would have affected the recent election; whether this would serve the public interest; whether the elimination of this doctrine has led to a higher level of polarized political views; and whether a similar policy would create an unconstitutional restriction on freedom of the press, or would foster productive discourse consistent with the goals of the freedom of expression doctrine.
3:30 p.m. Reception
