IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/fosoec/v48y2019i2p137-146.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interrogating the Analogy of the Marketplace of Ideas, Interpreting the First Amendment

Author

Listed:
  • Zoe Sherman

Abstract

An oft-cited argument for the speech rights guaranteed in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution is that free trade in the metaphorical marketplace of ideas is a route toward truth. That is, competition in the market should lead to the success of the best ideas and the demise of falsehoods. But this metaphorical marketplace of ideas coexists with a literal marketplace of ideas in which communications professionals provide the speech and assemble the audiences that clients pay for. The literal marketplace is an arena in which those who pay pursue advantages in shaping communications in their own favor, not an arena structured to support the pursuit of an objective truth. The clash between the metaphorical and literal marketplaces of ideas bears importantly on first amendment jurisprudence. I apply this clashing marketplaces framework to two important first amendment cases of the past decade, Citizens United and Janus.

Suggested Citation

  • Zoe Sherman, 2019. "Interrogating the Analogy of the Marketplace of Ideas, Interpreting the First Amendment," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(2), pages 137-146, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:fosoec:v:48:y:2019:i:2:p:137-146
    DOI: 10.1080/07360932.2019.1601123
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/07360932.2019.1601123
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/07360932.2019.1601123?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:fosoec:v:48:y:2019:i:2:p:137-146. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RFSE20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.