These ideas for spotting issues are an edited version of what you will encounter in law school should you decide that's what you want to do. In law school, you'll follow the IRAC model -- Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion.In this class, however, we don't do conclusions.
The extent of these tips may be more than you need for your Case Report. Most issues can be stated in one to three questions for most Media Law Reports.
LEGAL ISSUES SHOULD ALWAYS BE STATED AS QUESTIONS
In some cases, you will need to be sure that your issues include a recognition of the government interest in restricting speech and the competing interests. For instance, the government has tried often to restrict indecent speech on the Internet. Its interest is to protect children. The competing interest is that adults have the right to view and read indecent material. In an Internet indeceny case, one of the issues might be: "Is the Communications Decency Act 's attempt to protect children from indecent speech on the Internet too restrictive of adult's rights to be Constititional?"
Some cases don't require showing the government interest. See the example at the bottom of the page.
I -- The facts of a case suggest an issue.
The key to issue spotting is being able to identify which facts raise which issues. The law is complex, so the presence or absence of one fact (such as whether a news story was for print or broadcast, or what time of day a broadcast was presented) can eliminate or add issues to a case thereby raising an entirely different rule of law.
The cases you read may also contain language that signals the important issue. For instance, the judge may simply state:
"The case turns upon the question whether...."
OR "We come then to the basic issue in the case."
However, you need to develop issue-spotting skills on your own. Ask yourself some of these questions as you read the case:
Whenever you read a case, state the issue as a question referring to particular facts. See the example to see how it is done
II -- Is the issue about the elements of the plaintiff's burden of proof?
Break down the law into its component parts. In other words, ask the question: What elements of the rule must be proven?
III -- Is the issue about a defense that was presented in the lower court?
In the case we talked about in class, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette v. Fitzhugh, the newspaper published a photograph of J. Michael Fitzhugh, instead of Eugene Fitzhugh, who was the person described as being indicted for Whitewater offenses. J. Michael Fitzhugh sued for libel. Since one of the elements of libelhe Arkansas Supreme Court had to decide whether publishing the wrong photo was the same as using defamatory words.
Issue: Does publishing the wrong photograph with a newspaper story about an indictment satisfy the element of defamatory language for purposes of libel?