Commercial speech is defined as being speech or writing on behalf of a business with the intent of earning revenue or profit
Respond to at least two of your peers’ posts (as well as any comments made by your instructor) in a substantive manner and provide information or concepts that they may not have considered. Each response should have a minimum of 100 words. Support your position by using information from the week’s readings. You are encouraged to post your required replies earlier in the week to promote more meaningful and interactive discourse in this discussion forum. Continue to monitor the discussion forum until Day 7 and respond with robust dialogue to anyone who replies to your initial post.
COLLAPSE SUBDISCUSSIONTonya Hatcher
Tonya Hatcher
Yesterday Dec 1 at 10:52pm
Commercial speech is defined as being speech or writing on behalf of a business with the intent of earning revenue or profit (Schultz, 2009). Unlike non-commercial speech, commercial speech only has an intermediate level of protection under the First Amendment. First and foremost if the speech is misleading or illegal, there is no protection under the First Amendment, leaving the government free to regulate it without constraint. If it is not misleading or illegal in content, then the court must ask if the government interest is substantial. If the answer is yes, then the court must determine whether the regulation proposed on the commercial speech directly advances that interest, and if it is more extensive than necessary to serve that interest. In the case of Rubin v. Coors Brewing Co. (1995), among the reasons listed, one was that the government’s asserted interest in curbing “strength wars”, which could potentially lead to greater alcoholism and its social costs, was more extensive than necessary, stating that there were other available alternatives to the labeling ban which would not violate the First Amendment’s protections for commercial speech Coors use of alcohol strength in its advertising was considered commercial speech by the Supreme Court (Rubin v. Coors Brewing Co., 1995).
In the hypothetical situation that this had been cocaine instead of beer, it would still be considered commercial speech because it would still be proposing a commercial transaction (Langvardt et al., 2019, p. 88). There would be no protection provided by the First Amendment for this due to the fact that cocaine is an illegal product in the United States, and as stated above, if it is found to be misleading or illegal, the government is free to regulate the commercial speech without constraint.
Langvardt, A. W., Barnes, A. J., Prenkert, J. D., McCrory, M. A., & Perry, J. E. (2019). Business law: The ethical, global, and e-commerce environment (17th ed.). Retrieved from https://www.vitalsource.com (Links to an external site.)
Rubin v. Coors Brewing Co., 514 U.S. 476 (1995)
Schultz, D. (2009). Commercial Speech. The First Amendment Encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/encyclopedia
Answer preview to commercial speech is defined as being speech or writing on behalf of a business with the intent of earning revenue or profit
APA
139 words