“Free Speech” and U.S. Public Access Producers

  • John W. Higgins


Community video in the United States emerged from decades of global experiences with activist participatory projects in electronic media, such as the tin miners’ radio network in Bolivia, community radio in the United States, the Challenge for Change program in Canada, and traditions of radical documentary film around the world. Within this context, public access cable television in the United States represents a unique achievement for community-based media around the world: The institutionalization of a process that provides people the opportunity to create video programs and air them on local cable television channels—an oasis of “free speech” and “free ideas” in a commercialized, corporate global media desert.


Public Sphere Public Access Free Speech Community Television Cable Television 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aufderheide, P. (1992). Cable television and the public interest. Journal of Communication. Vol. 42, no. 1 (Winter): 52–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. —. (2000). The daily planet: A critic on the capitalist culture beat. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
  3. Blau, A. (1992). The promise of public access. The Independent. Vol. 15, no. 3 (April): 22–26.Google Scholar
  4. Caristi, D. (1992). Expanding free expression in the marketplace: Broadcasting And the public forum. New York: Quorum.Google Scholar
  5. Dervin, B. and K. Clark. (2003). Communication and democracy: A mandate for procedural invention, in Sense-making methodology reader: Selected writings of Brenda Dervin. B. Dervin, Foreeman-Wernet, and L. Lauterbach, eds., pp. 165–193. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dervin, B., T. Osborne, P. Jaikumar-Mahey, R. Huesca, and J. Higgins. (1993). Dialogue as communication: The in-between of modernity/postmodernity. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  7. Devine, R. H. (1992). Video, access and agency. Paper presented at the annual conference of the National Federation of Local Cable Programmers, St. Paul, Minnesota.Google Scholar
  8. —. (2001). 33 years later: Why access? Community Media Review. Vol. 24, no. 2:37–39.Google Scholar
  9. —. (1992). Access in the 21st century: The future of a public. Community Media Review. Vol. 29, no. 1–2 (Spring/Summer): 29–31, 2006.Google Scholar
  10. Downing, J. D. H. (1999). “Hate speech” and “First amendment absolutism” discourses in the United States. Discourse and Society. Vol. 10, no. 2:175–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Engelman, R. (1990). The origins of public access cable television: 1966–1972. Journalism Monographs. 123 (October): 1–47.Google Scholar
  12. Fleischmann, S. and G. Berkowitz. (2004). First come, first served: Who’s served? Community Media Review. Vol. 27, no. 3 (Autumn): 13.Google Scholar
  13. Fuller, L. K. (1994). Community television in the United States: A sourcebook on public, educational, and governmental access. Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  14. Good, L. (1989). Power, hegemony, and communication theory, in Cultural politics in contemporary America. I. Angus and S. T. Jhally, eds., pp. 51–64. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Gramsci, A. (1946/1989.) Letters from prison. Translated and edited by Lynne Lawner. New York: Noonday.Google Scholar
  16. Habermas, J. (1962/1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere. Translated by Thomas Buerger with Frederick Lawrence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  17. Halleck, D. D. (2002). Gathering storm: The cyber forum of indymedia, in Hand-held visions: The impossible possibilities of community media. D. D. Halleck, ed., pp. 415–431. New York: Fordham.Google Scholar
  18. Higgins, J. W. (1999). Community television and the vision of media literacy, social action, and empowerment. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media. Vol. 43, no. 4:1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. —. (2000). Negotiating tolerance: Lived practices in a public access facility. Paper presented at the annual conference of the National Communication Association. Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  20. —. (2001). The praxis of access: Access and global activism. Community Media Review. Vol. 24, no. 2 (Summer): 19–21.Google Scholar
  21. —. (2003). Bridging practice and theory: “White papers” in public access cable television. Paper presented at annual conference of the International Communication Association. San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  22. Howley, K. (2005). Community media: People, places, and communication technologies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Johnson, F. (1994). The real work is media education. Community Media Review. Vol. 17, no.1 (January–February): 4 +.Google Scholar
  24. King, D. L. and C. Mele. (1999). Making public access television: Community participation, media literacy and the public sphere. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media. Vol. 43, no. 4:603–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kirkpatrick, B. (2002). Re-thinking “access”: Cultural barriers to public access television. Community Media Review. Vol. 25, no. 2 (Summer): 20–23.Google Scholar
  26. Klein, H. (2005). Public access television: An institutional analysis. Community Media Review 28: 4 (Winter): 32–34.Google Scholar
  27. Koning, D. (2002). First come, first served: Last one standing. Community Media Review 25:3 (Summer): 14–15. (note: CMR should be italicized)Google Scholar
  28. Kucharski, C. (2001). 1976 & 2000 U.S. vitals. Community Television Review. Vol. 24, no. 2:91.Google Scholar
  29. Linder, L. R. 1999. Public access television: America’s electronic soapbox. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  30. Lippmann, W. (1939). The indispensable opposition. Atlantic Monthly. Vol. 164, no. 2 (August): 186–190.Google Scholar
  31. Lukes, S. (1974). Power: A radical view. New York: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Meiklejohn, A. (1948). Political freedom: The constitutional powers of the people. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  33. Mill, J. S. (1859). On liberty. New York: Bantam, 1993.Google Scholar
  34. Peterson, K. (2004). Progress or dystopia for community media? Community Media Review. Vol. 27, no. 1 (Spring): 33–37.Google Scholar
  35. Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc., et al. v. Federal Communications Commission et al. 395 U.S. 367 (1969).Google Scholar
  36. Rethinking access philosophy. (2002). Community Media Review. No. 25:3 (Summer).Google Scholar
  37. Rodriguez, C. (2001). Fissures in the mediascape: An international study of citizens’ media. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.Google Scholar
  38. Ruggles, M. A. (1994). The audience reflected in the medium of law: A critique of the political economy of speech rights in the United States. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  39. Schauer, F. (1985). Free speech and its philosophical roots, in The first amendment: The legacy of George Mason. T. D. Shumate, ed., pp. 132–155. Fairfax, VA: George Mason UP.Google Scholar
  40. Stoney, G. (2001). The essential George Stoney. Community Media Review. Vol. 24, no. 2 (Summer): 29–31.Google Scholar
  41. Streeter, T. (1990). Beyond freedom of speech and the public interest: The relevance of critical legal studies to communications policy. Journal of Communication. Vol. 40, no. 2 (Spring): 43–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Linda K. Fuller 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • John W. Higgins

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations