The role of theory and evidence in media regulation and law: a response to Baker and a defense of empirical legal studies. (article by C. Edwin Baker ... from: Federal Communications Law Journal

This digital document is an article from Federal Communications Law Journal, published by Federal Communications Law Journal on June 1, 2009. The length of the article is 16391 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.

From the author: We thank Professor Baker for a stimulating response to an Article in which we offered empirical evidence of editorial viewpoint diversity in the face of media consolidation. We appreciate his praise of the Article as "apply[ing] innovative statistical techniques" and as "far superior methodologically to most empirical studies" he has seen. At the same time, Baker "denies the policy relevance" to our Article because empirical evidence is "entirely irrelevant" to the field of media regulation under his preferred normative theory. Baker argues sweepingly that the legal academy's increased willingness to consider the perspectives of quantitative empiricists and positive theorists is "malignant," and that law is best confined to normative theory and "value-based inquiries"--to the exclusion of positive investigation. Because of the provocative nature of the specific critiques of our Article and the general across-the-board indictment of positive scholarship and empirical legal studies, we respond.

Citation Details
Title: The role of theory and evidence in media regulation and law: a response to Baker and a defense of empirical legal studies. (article by C. Edwin Baker in this issue, p. 651)
Author: Daniel E. Ho
Publication:Federal Communications Law Journal (Magazine/Journal)
Date: June 1, 2009
Publisher: Federal Communications Law Journal
Volume: 61 Issue: 3 Page: 673(43)

Distributed by Gale, a part of Cengage Learning