- Chilling effect (term)
A chilling effect is a term in law and communication which describes a situation where speech or conduct is suppressed by fear of penalization at the interests of an individual or group. It may prompt self-censorship and therefore hamper
free speech . Since many attacks rely onlibel law, the term libel chill is also often used.Fact|date=June 2008Usage
In
United States and Canadianlaw , the term "chilling effects" refers to the stifling attribute that vague or overbroad laws may have on legitimate speech activity. Recognition of a law that may permit a loophole for such "chilling effect" as a vehicle forpolitical libel orvexation litigation provides a prompt to allow changes to suchdefamation laws, and therefore prevent the suppression of free speech and censorship.Fact|date=June 2008History
The term chilling effect had been in use in the United States since as early as
1950 . [cite web
url= http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/vanlr4&id=547&collection=journals
title= 4 Vanderbilt Law Review 533, at 539 (1950-1951): The Supreme Court and Civil Liberties
accessdate=
last= Freund
first= Paul A.
date=
publisher=
pages=
archiveurl=
archivedate=
quote= ] It however became further used as a legal term whenWilliam J. Brennan , a justice of the United States Supreme court, used it in a judicial decision ("Lamont v. Postmaster General ") which required a postal patron receiving "communist political propaganda" [cite web
url= http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/freedomline/current/guest_commentary/saffire-shield-law.htm
title= Safire Urges Federal Journalist Shield Law
accessdate= 2008-06-18
last= Safire
first= William
authorlink=
coauthors=
date= 2005-07-20
publisher= Center For Individual Freedom
archiveurl=
archivedate=
quote= Justice Brennan reported having written a 1965 decision striking down a state’s intrusion on civil liberty because of its “chilling effect upon the exercise of First Amendment rights…”] to specifically authorize the delivery.cite web
url= http://supreme.justia.com/us/381/301/
title= LAMONT V. POSTMASTER GENERAL, 381 U. S. 301 (1965)
accessdate= 2008-06-18
publisher= Justia
archiveurl=
archivedate=
quote= ]The "Lamont" case however, did not center around a law that explicitly stifles free speech. A "chilling effect" referred to at the time a "deterrent effect" on freedom of expression — even when there is no law explicitly prohibiting it. However in general, "chilling effect" is now often used in reference to laws or actions that do not explicitly prohibit legitimate speech, but that impose undue burdens.
See also
*
Censorship
*Chilling Effects
*Culture of fear
*Fear mongering
*Legal terrorism
*Media transparency
*Prior restraint
*RIAA
*Strategic lawsuit against public participation ("SLAPP")References
Notes
External links
* [http://www.chillingeffects.org Chilling Effects Clearinghouse] , containing many current examples of alleged chilling effects
* [http://www.hfac.uh.edu/comm/media_libel/libel/definition.html Terms associated with libel cases]
* [http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-270.html Cato Policy Analysis No. 270] Chilling The Internet? Lessons from FCC Regulation of Radio Broadcasting
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.