Freedom of the press has long been a paramount concern of the dynamic human. A free press may act as a catalyst to thought in the eternal synthesis of the real and the ideal. The free person, whether lawyer, artist, poet, or political philosopher has traditionally sought the freedoms of speech and press, and the Bill of Rights attempts in the first amendment to insulate discourse from the desires of those who would force a dichotomous choice on people seeking knowledge of the whole. The first amendment in its linear terms proposes to act as a shield, protecting expression not from personal or private wrath but from calculated suppression by majoritarian democratic government. Professor Barron, beginning with a seminal law review article and continuing in this "good book," suggests that it is far more fruitful to approach freedoms of press and speech and consequently first amendment constitutionalism as an antimajoritarian idea than solely as a restraint on government. Barron argues that the majority of media owners, publishers, and broadcasters are dedicated to "single-minded hucksterism" and a passion for profits. In the electronic media this consuming majority interest yields not a onesidedness but a blandness as the abiding characteristic of American broadcasting.
John R. Snowden,
Barron's “Good Book” Examines Access Notion: Freedom of the Press for Whom? The Right of Access to Mass Media—By Jerome A. Barron,
53 Neb. L. Rev. 321
Available at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol53/iss2/10