COM 450 Final

Running Head: Technologies Used by Communication Professionals 1
Zack Reese
Buffalo State
April 2016

Technologies Used by Communication Professionals 2
Contents
Contents...........................................................................................................................................2
Abstract............................................................................................................................................3
Part I: Topic Introduction & Background Information....................................................................4
Part II: Literature Reviews and Research .......................................................................................6
Part III: Recap - Into the Future.....................................................................................................19
Part IV: Legalities..........................................................................................................................20
Part V: My Future & What I Will Use & My Gratifications.........................................................35
Appendix I: Survey Questions & Results......................................................................................36
Appendix II: Interview Questions & Results.................................................................................37
Appendix III: References...............................................................................................................39

Abstract
Within this paper, the public uses and gratifications of different technologies used by
different communications practitioners will be explored. That is to say that the different ways
that journalists use technology from public relations professionals from media production
professionals. I will be conducting online surveys as well surveys among the staff of Buffalo
State's Communications Department in order to fulfill the constructs of uses and gratifications.
Understanding what technologies each uses is so important moving forward in the age of
technology as I join the working world. This paper will also include results from interviews with
professionals and professional articles.
This topic is growing and changing by the day with advancements in social media, film
technologies, the internet at large and the lines are being blurred as to which practitioners use
which technologies and why and how. What I mean is that a traditional print journalist, is
different than a broadcast journalist, which is different from somebody who tweets news on
Twitter or updates on the news through Facebook. The PR world relies heavily on social media
but also use other technologies. Media Production practitioners rely heavily on audio and visual
equipment but also heavily use social media. Social media truly is the tie that binds all of our
different professions in our field. This will be explored to its entirety in my piece.
This paper will break down the intricacies of the topic and try to answer the questions of
what technologies each discipline uses primarily and which they don't use and why. This paper
will effectively answer who, what, where, when, why and how.

Part I: Topic Introduction & Background Information
My research topic has everything to do with the communications world at large and is so
imperative to understanding the culture of our fields. As a student about to enter the real world,
this has never been a more important topic to cover. My topic is the “public uses and
gratifications of different technologies used by different communications practitioners.”
This topic is growing and changing by the day with advancements in social media, film
technologies, the internet at large and the lines are being blurred as to which practitioners use
which technologies and why and how. What I mean is that a traditional print journalist, is
different than a broadcast journalist, which is different from somebody who tweets news on
Twitter or updates on the news through Facebook. The PR world relies heavily on social media
but also use other technologies. Media Production practitioners rely heavily on audio and visual
equipment but also heavily use social media. Social media truly is the tie that binds all of our
different professions in our field. This will be explored to its entirety in my piece.
I read articles, a lot of articles on the different professions and their subdivisions. I
provided a survey to professionals and students in the communications field through the use of
Google Forms and connecting it to my LinkedIn account, and other social media outlets. I
conducted interviews with professionals who have been or are in the communications field and I
used prior experience and prior meetings and interviews in order to answer my research
questions. This paper is basically going to be a culmination of everything I've learned during my
career at SUNY Buffalo State and is a collection of my college experience as a double major in
Public Communication and Communication Studies. I've taken most of the classes in the

department and now I'm putting everything I've learned and am going to learn together. My
choice of study changed over the course of my college career from journalism to public
communication. This change has made it apparent to me that although often times, as it will be
discussed throughout this paper that the lines do blur between the disciplines they are vastly
different.
The research questions that presented themselves to me are the basis of this paper. They
are what all of my research have lead up to answering. This is beneficial to anyone pursuing a
career in the communications field.
1.) What technologies do specific communication practitioners use? (Journalists, broadcast
journalists, PR professionals, media production personnel, etc.)
2.) How are these technologies used effectively?
3.) What are some up and coming and technologies coming soon to the communications
world?
4.) What legal issues can these professionals find when using certain technologies?
5.) As a young professional getting ready to take on the world, what technologies will I use
personally?
Those five questions are explored entirely throughout the confines of this research and
will be answered if not with a definitive answer, then with a good argument from any of the
professions. Technologies Used by Communication Professionals: A Uses and Gratifications
Approach.

As far as my personal hypothesis goes I believe each discipline will be employing the use
of social media heavily and that social media will be the public relations professionals’ main
source of technology. They will use this in order to fulfill their purposes of being brand
ambassadors. Journalists will lean heavily on software such as Microsoft Office and Adobe
Creative Suites in order to create the content that they share on a daily basis with mass
audiences. Finally, those in media production will rely heavily on production equipment such as
cameras, lighting kits, and sound equipment. Again, this equipment would be used to produce the
content that is shared through the various media outlets.
Part II: Literature Reviews and Research
With technology constantly growing and changing, the way with which people
communicate with one another grows and changes concurrently. This is true even more so for
communication professionals across three major platforms: media production, public relations,
and journalists. The three while bearing many similarities also have several differences. While
each of the three disciplines use social media, each puts more of an emphasis on specific social
media outlets. Without going into too much detail just yet, a prime example would be a media
production professional using YouTube over a public relations professional using Twitter and a
journalist choosing Facebook. The world of social media is growing ever larger and with new
tools such as FaceTime, Twitter, Facebook, and Snapchat we can communicate effectively on a
global scale, and digitally face-to-face.
What's interesting is that for every effective communication, there is just as much
destructive communication. In the last century the American people have evolved from
telegraphs and one-way radios to public telephones to home phones (landlines) to cellular phones

to smartphones and now “phablets” and smart watches. There is even a prototype currently in
development of a phone chip that is implanted into the human inner arm and then the arm itself
would become the phone's screen. The chip also comes with a receiver attached to it, which
raising the arm to the mouth or ear will allow for conversation. This is a simple example of
where we have been and where we are going.
Literature Reviews
Understanding what uses and gratifications actually are is the first and foremost thing needed in
this study of technology. Uses and gratifications as explained by (Jennings Bryant, 2009) are
Beginning with journalists; journalists report the news in many different ways and
fashions and of course in the digital age, anyone with a Twitter account is suddenly a journalist
making posts and taking pictures of newsworthy events and in some cases even being paid for
their material. What I didn’t realize however, and it should have been fairly obvious is that even
if there are different sectors of journalism and places that “do” journalism, each has a different
set of house rules that a specific journalist must follow. Different professions within the
journalism world are traditional journalists, who use writing as a medium, photojournalists,
editors, broadcast journalists, and producers to name a few.
Another thing of interest is the timing factor. As far as print journalism goes, it’s sent out
bright and early so that people can be all caught up after waking up but before work. Then we
have the 6 p.m. news and the nightly news for those people getting home from work and sitting
down with dinner and those people who want to see what they missed all day before going to
bed. Something they have in common is that neither really broadcasts in the middle of the day,

because who’s going to see it? People are busy.
I take advantage of the timing spectrum in my own work, especially as someone who has
to use social media for work. I post according to these timing guidelines because I want the most
response from people. I have found though that time needs to be adjusted for certain mediums
depending on who the audience is.
Something else of note is the fact that for a big news event, all of the media in the area
are going to be moving in a pack in order to get the inside scoop. They all report on the same
thing, in the same place. This can be seen with any local homicide and even on national outlets
where stories coincide and people converge. You can see it any night of the week by scrolling
through news channels and programs. (Bennett, 2012)
The media is an excellent representation of how public relations and marketing
professionals use communication technologies to reach their public's. The media caters to a
specific audience in order to reach a specific goal. In this case, it's in order to market something
to someone. It's advertising at its ground level. Examples of “PR people” include marketing
personnel, advertising personnel to some degree, publicists, agency workers, media relations
personnel, community engagement managers, public relations coordinators, social media
coordinators and directors, digital marketing personnel, and directors of communications. The
list goes on and on. Again, the internet has a huge stake in the proceedings of marketing
communications. With the growing digital age, the way in which advertisers advertise has had to
change holistically in the last ten years. I can remember being a kid and listening to radio ads and
seeing ads more during regular television watching. Now I simply stream TV or watch recorded
TV and skip the ads. The internet is an extremely heavy medium to approach possible consumers

now. I see advertisements on all the websites I visit, before YouTube videos, during Pandora
music sessions and more. The advertisers have made it their obligation to interject themselves
into all forms of internet media.
Something else this particular chapter talked about was five theoretical and empirical
approaches to understanding media effects. These five approaches are attitudes toward the
medium, uses of the medium, involvement while using the medium, mood states affecting media
usage and interactivity of the medium. To understand how to market using media effects, a
marketer must understand attitudes of their audience towards something. How something can be
used by the audience, how involved the audience is while using the medium and the moods of
the audience as a result of this interaction.
This all ties back into how the media effects us as the consumer market and how we in
turn effect the media. It's a two-way street and one cannot function without the other. (Jennings
Bryant, 2009)
Continuing on with the discussion on public relations professionals, Chapter 20 of the
same book described in the previous passage was an excellent resource to dive deeper into the
uses and gratifications a PR Pro receives from their technology of choice.
According to the reading, public relations campaigns can be broken down into seven
different parts. These parts are the following: (1) They are purposive attempts (2) to inform,
persuade, or motivate behavior changes (3) in a relatively well-defined and large audience, (4)
generally for noncommercial benefits to the individuals and/or society at large, (5) typically
within a given time period, (6) by means of organized communication activities involving mass
media, and (7) often complemented by interpersonal support. In lamens turns to me this means,

creating a plan for a business or organization with a purpose in mind in order to target a desired
audience to benefit the organization from point A to point B, within a given time period. This is
what I tell all of my members for my PR firm on campus Communications Unlimited Co.
For me, at this point in my professional career this chapter served as an excellent
refresher on my business model and on how I can incorporate the media even further into my
research for our various clients. Our current two clients are Buffalo Architectural Casting (A
construction company) and The Wellness Institute of Greater Buffalo (Non-profit). It's pretty
blatant that these two clients are vastly different and the plans must be catered to both in a way
that draws in the mass audience both are trying to achieve.
A true understanding of audience and socioeconomic properties is a must and this falls in
line with budgeting. Most clients want a low cost campaign plan. For each plan insane amounts
of research must be conducted especially now in the digital age where different social media
outlets are used by different clients and in different ways. Again, this falls in line with catering to
a specific company or organization with a specific goal in mind. (Jennings Bryant, 2009)
Media Production practitioners include directors, video and sound editors, video and
sound producers, actors, production teams and personnel, and anybody who helps with the
running of a media source or outlet. There are so many moving pieces and parts to a production.
This brings us to the main point of the research questions presented: what are uses and
gratifications? The Uses and Gratifications Approach is laid out into two different parts. These
parts are: (1) the media, by themselves, are not necessary or sufficient cause of audience effects
and (2) a medium or message is only a single influence in the social and psychological
environment, although it is an important one. With mediating factors such as individual

predispositions, selective processing, group norms, message dissemination via interpersonal
channels, opinion leadership, and free-enterprise nature of the media to name a few, each has a
distinct effect on how audiences perceive media. Communications professionals are all about
creating and distributing content (media) to various audience.
Looking at uses and gratifications psychologically, a medium or message is a source of
influence within the context of other possible influences. This requires the use of an active
audience, because you cannot leave an impression on a passive one. Mediated communication is
socially and psychologically constrained and this is because individual influences constrain
direct media effects. In plain English this simply translates to the fact that what media is released
to the public has an effect on that public down to the individual level. People are different, they
have free will and so they absorb things differently. This is important to note because, a
communications professional is going to have a different use for a certain technologies and use it
differently from the next. They are also going to receive a gratification for that technology that is
individualized and centralized to them on the secular level. The active audience is the
professional themselves.
In looking at uses and gratifications functionally, it is apparent that there are four
functions to the approach. These four are: surveillance, correlation, transmission, and
entertainment. In this example, surveillance comes from the professionals who see what works
for them and what doesn’t, the correlation comes from putting their ideas regarding technology
to the test. This can be seen most commonly with social media, especially in the realm of
journalism as journalists have begun to tweet stories alongside their posting in print and online.
Transmission is the content and media created that is given to an audience, and finally

entertainment is the entirely gratification-based aspect in which the person receives some sort of
value from the instrument they chose to use. The uses and gratifications paradigm can be broken
down into the following elements:
• Our psychological and social environment
• Our needs and motives to communicate as communication professionals
• The content/media we are creating/distributing
• Our attitudes and expectations about the content/media
• Alternatives to using the content/media
• Our communications behavior
• The outcomes of our behavior
The paradigm can then be further broken down into the following objectives:
• To explain how people use content/media to gratify their needs
• To understand motives for content/media behavior
• To identify functions or consequences that follow from needs, motives, and
behavior (Jennings Bryant, 2009)
In a thesis written by Thomas E. Ruggiero at the University of Texas at El Paso, 16 years ago, he
discussed the uses and gratifications theory at the dawn of the 21st
century. This is what he said:
“If the Internet is a technology that many predict will be genuinely transformative, it will lead to
profound changes in media users’ personal and social habits and roles. The Internet’s growth
rates are exponential. The number of users has doubled in each of the last 6 years. If this

development continues at the same rate, the Internet will soon be as widely disseminated a
medium in daily usage as television or the telephone. Thus, electronic communication
technology may sufficiently alter the context of media use that current mass communication
theories do not yet address.” This is exactly what has happened and my research proves that fact.
(Ruggiero, 2000)
Another thing to think about is how communication professionals globally use
communication technologies and in what fashion these are used. This essentially boils down to
the languages of different countries and how this language barrier can cause discord. For
example, in many Asian countries, such as China, Facebook is illegal to use and is banned on all
internet servers. (Riley, 2015) For the context of the research conducted for this topic, I looked at
an article detailing what public relations is like for practitioners in Hong Kong. Internationally,
English can be seen as a technology as well. Language itself is a communication technology.
Hong Kong may seem vastly different from the United States, but within the confines of
the business world their similarities shine brightest. Hong Kong surprisingly seems to use
English as its common language among its transnational public relations companies. English is
what connects the PR world internationally. The entirety of the article entitled “Creative English
and public relations in Hong Kong” by Anne Peirson-Smith, Vijay J. Bhatia, Stephen Bremner,
and Rodney H. Jones had to do with this notion of using English as a connecting tool. English is
also seen as the “international lingua franca of business and commerce.” (Peirson-Smith, 2010 p.
523)
Of course this notion had to be put to the test. The theory behind the experiment was
implemented over the course of two years starting in 2008 and ending in 2010. The experiment

was conducted only in Hong Kong. The purpose of the experiment was to understand just how
public relations directors would perceive the importance of English in the workplace, and how it
impacted their creativity. The experiment was a series of interviews in which 16 practitioners
were interview from 10 different PR firms. These firms consisted of six small and medium-sized
corporations and four large multi-national corporations. Of the interviewed nine were female and
seven were male. Seven were local Hong Kong inhabitants, while the remaining nine came from
England, Australia, and North America. This was to insure that all facets were covered and to
avoid the law of the instrument. The acquisition of the quantitative data gave way for the creation
of the qualitative data. The qualitative data of course being how English was perceived by the
practitioners. (Peirson-Smith, 2010 p. 526)
The findings from the interviews and their subsequent follow-up interviews (cross-
validating) found that there were three key themes that kept appearing throughout the data. These
themes being: English as the language of international business and public relations practice,
English as a necessary tool of collaboration, and that English is a ‘work in progress’. The
literature review of the assignment capitalized on expanding these three key themes. This will be
discussed in Part 3, which will encompass the results found during the course of the interviews.
(Peirson-Smith, 2010 p. 526)
The results of the research in the simplest terms showed that the hypothesis already
mentioned was exactly as hypothesized. English was seen as the dominant language by all of the
practitioners interviewed. In breaking down the key terms found, we can see how this conclusion
was come to. According to the dissection of the first finding which was: English as the language
of international business and public relations practice, English was seen as a means to heighten

each company’s brand and make it more marketable than competitors. However, a small few did
think that English should be kept within the realm of business and out of public relations.
English was seen however, as the language of creativity in the fact that it is constantly growing
and changing and adding new words, etc. Next, English was seen as a tool for collaboration. This
is to say that English is extremely essential for working together. This is seen more often than not
in the PR industry which is all collaborations. However, English can be interpreted differently
based on whether it is spoken or written, many practitioners noted. This could of course hurt
collaboration in some aspects. The first two themes are actually quite similar. Finally, it was
found that English is a work in progress. This can help a corporation as they can learn new words
to describe things creatively but it can also hurt for the same reason that not everybody is as
proficient in the English language as the person in the next cubicle. But with most of the world
speaking English learning it in many foreign countries is now a necessity.
Altogether, I think based on how this was written on the onset how the data would show
up after being tested. The authors kind of spoiled their own ending, by being perhaps a little too
overzealous in their writing approach. I did learn however, how much of an impact an interview
can be to a researcher. It leads to a decrease in mortality, by urging subjects to be used on the
spot so as not to lose them. It was as thorough as possible for a piece about English being the
dominant language of the international business and public relations sectors. They couldn’t
expand too, too much simply because it would’ve been far too repetitive and overkill. This was a
good piece to explain how important English is to the business world at large and give credible
evidence as to why.
Survey

As a part of the research to answer my hypothesis, (See Part I) I conducted an online
survey through Google Forms. This survey was distributed throughout my various social media
channels, including Facebook, Twitter, and most importantly LinkedIn. My reasoning behind this
was that often time’s participants of a survey feel it much easier to take online. I offered it to my
LinkedIn Connections, of which I currently have 364, most of which are professionals within the
communications field in the Buffalo area. Google Forms is also an excellent program to use
because instead of hand writing each of the results and calculating totals, Forms does that for
you, complete with bar/pie graphs and responses.
This particular survey came back to me with 54 respondents and so I based a huge portion
of my research on it. It was a way to hear directly from the public and the results were striking.
Of the 54 respondents, the majority of respondents (61.1%), were women. 37% identified as
male, and 1.9% identified as other. This wasn’t entirely surprising to me because a lot of the
respondents were connections that I have made in the PR world, which is of course, female-
dominated. 53.7% of respondents were between the ages of 18-24, which was the majority.
About half of the respondents were involved in the communications field, and half weren’t. This
was an interesting point because it gave me the unique ability to open up my research questions a
little bit and broaden the scale. Of the respondents that were in the communications field,
positions included, communication students, a fundraising assistant, PR & Marketing
Coordinators, public relations/communication interns, social media coordinators/directors, two
Assistant Directors of Communications, a Creative Services Traffic Coordinator, a Marketing
and Administrative Assistant, a Production Manager at a records label, a reporter, an Associate
Producer at NBC Universal, a documentary filmmaker, and a Director of Development in

Broadcast for The Associated Press. Professionals in each of these backgrounds helped to add
credibility to my research questions.
So now that I knew my demographics and who I was working with and their positions,
the following questions dealt with technologies in use by these people and the uses and
gratifications they receive from using them. An overwhelming 53 out of 54 respondents (98.1%),
used social media, this was directly followed by 94.4% of respondents using computers, laptops,
tables, and email. 79.6% use software such as Microsoft Office, Adobe Creative Suites or
Gargeband. Interestingly enough 37% use video/internet messaging tools such as Skype or
Google Hangouts. When asked which technology they used the most daily (for their work),
59.3% of respondents chose email over social media. Only 33.3% use social media in their work
every day. This was striking. Interestingly enough however, when asked about the importance of
social media to their work, 40.7% of respondents said they needed to use it daily. This was the
majority of respondents. The same question was asked in regards to the use of technology daily,
with 74.1% of respondents admitting to needed technology daily to complete their jobs. This just
shows how far technology has come and its necessity in the workplace.
A main proponent to the research questions presented throughout this document pertains
to the uses and gratifications received from using technologies in the workplace. The overarching
response in regards to a use of a certain communication technology was communication. This
was followed by correspondence with colleagues, which is effectively communication, and the
monitoring of social media channels. The gratifications received were a lot more varied, as
expected. The most common answer was speed. Professionals in any field, generally appreciate
speed and ease of use. The gratification of using communication technologies to receive instant

feedback, and quickly gather responses was common ground for many respondents.
Communication also doubled as a gratification for many as well. I absolutely agree with the
notion that a use can also double as a gratification.
The final research question which the survey could help to answer was in regards to the
future of technology within this field. “What’s the next big thing?” Many respondents felt that
VR or virtual reality is what’s next. One particular respondent even commented with “virtual
meetings.” Of course we have this in a way with Google Hangouts, Skype, etc., but perhaps
more refined and complete with holographic projections of the people you are meeting with? The
second most common answer was “wearable technology.” With the inclusion of smart watches,
they will only keep improving and updating from this point forward.
Email Interviews
For an in-depth understanding of this topic in an effort to answer at least four of the five
research questions presented; (Ignoring legalities, which could be covered by researching various
articles.) three interviews were held over email. These interviews were given to three
communications professionals, from three different disciplines. From the public relations sector,
I interviewed with Kevin Manne, who is the current President of PRSA Buffalo/Niagara, Ken
Cosentino, a young, local film director and producer who heads White Lion Studios as its CEO,
and a journalist from The Buffalo News who preferred to remain anonymous.
Each participant was asked seven questions. These questions were: 1. What is your
current position? 2. How long have you been in this position? 3. What is the technology that you
use most daily? 4. How does that specific technology benefit (gratify) you? 5. What technology

do you wish you used more/were more proficient with? 6. What do you think the “next big”
technology is? 7. Anything else to add regarding technology & communications? The answers
made sense, and it allowed for an older demographic to be heard then the 53.7% of 18-24 year-
olds who responded to the survey. I also deliberately interviewed three men to get a different
perspective than the majority of survey respondents who were women.
What I found was that each of the three had a technology that they used the most. For the
journalist, it was email. For Ken, production equipment, and Kevin responded with a split in
social media and email. Something else to note is that each man responded that they couldn’t do
their job effectively or at all without using technology. They needed to use it to reach the
gratification it granted.
It’s also interesting to note that each respondent felt that they needed to improve upon the
use of another communication technology in order to better complete their job. For the journalist
this technology was production equipment, for Ken and Kevin, it was social media. Each man
also stressed the importance of social media in today’s modern communications field. We need it.
Two of the three were also in the virtual reality bandwagon, commenting that it is undoubtedly
the next great technology.
Part III: Recap - Into the Future
As a result of this research, it’s pretty blatantly obvious what technologies professionals
in media production, journalism, and public relations are currently using. But now the question
that must be asked is: where are we going? We know where we have been and we know where
we are now, so what's next? Based on the culmination of my research and my college experience,
I truly do believe that social media is going to be the backbone of communication technology. It

has to, it's far too immersed in our lives day in and day out to not place so much of an impact on
it. Besides that, it's cost effective. Social media marketing and public relations is entirely the way
of the future. I say this because, everybody uses social media now. Regardless of the field. We
use it to get news, we use it to connect with colleagues. Twitter is the primary source for all
things PR and this has had a sort of bleeding effect into other disciplines. Now we have live
video through social media. The possibilities are endless.
I’m also going to go and join the virtual reality bandwagon as well. It’s edgy, it’s
innovative and it’s cool. Soon, we will have meetings and the like virtually in which we are face-
to-face with another person, miles and miles apart. This falls right into step with wearable
technology in the fact that we have smart watches in which we can communicate now. We can
literality talk to our wrists and use social media applications on a watch. Who’s to say that
holographic communication isn’t on its way? Regardless, one thing is certain: wherever
technology goes, communication won’t be far behind. Our field is constantly adapting and
growing with technology and being on top of trends in technology is essentially a part of our
work. Especially in public relations.
Part IV: Legalities
With technology constantly growing and changing, the way with which people
communicate with one another grows and changes concurrently. The world of social media is
growing ever larger and with new tools such as FaceTime, Twitter, Facebook, and Snapchat we
can communicate effectively on a global scale, and digitally face-to-face. What's interesting is
that for every effective communication, there is just as much destructive communication. This is

where distinguishing the differences between the two bring legalities into the fold. The law has
had to grow alongside the changing technology.
What constitutes as legal or illegal anymore within the vein of communication? What
boundaries are being crossed and who is getting hurt as a result of a form of communication? Is a
specific communication a threat to the well-being of a person? These are questions that the law
and the government has had to ask repeatedly as the cases involving the use of growing
technology increase.
In the last century the American people have evolved from telegraphs and one-way radios
to public telephones to home phones (landlines) to cellular phones to smartphones and now
“phablets” and smart watches. There is even a prototype currently in development of a phone
chip that is implanted into the human inner arm and then the arm itself would become the
phone's screen. The chip also comes with a receiver attached to which raising the arm to the
mouth or ear will allow for conversation. This is a simple example of where we have been and
where we are going. When put into a blatant starkness like so, it's pretty easy to see why the
evolution in our nation's legal ties to communication had to change. They had to grow with the
times. The legal implications of the change in communication technology in modern America is
an intricate and expanding criteria and depending on the situation can vary extensively.
We are seeing more and more grey areas, due to the freedoms we have technologically,
especially online. Our first amendment rights are being tried and tested in a new way virtually
every day.
This section will answer the question of what some legal implications can be due to the
change in communication technology and will give several examples of different situations

exemplifying different areas of the communication spectrum and comparing and contrasting
these cases. Cases highlighted are TMZ and their various scandals, social media libelous activity,
specifically on review site Yelp, The Edward Snowden leak of confidential information to the
news, “Celebgate,” and privacy rights, and online payment and fraud.
A relatively recent example of a case involving communication technologies and
subsequently legal entities is one that happens quite often: a TMZ lawsuit. TMZ started off as a
celebrity gossip website and eventually the site had such a following that cameras were allowed
into the site headquarters and the stories on the site were accentuated on television. The tie-in
television series follows the “journalists” who write on the gossip site and shows them as get
news tips and write on the tips. It shows their reactions to news and as a result their fan base has
grown immensely. Many times gossip is simply that: gossip.
TMZ makes millions of dollars yearly and cares more about audience shock value as
opposed to credibility currently. They would rather have a shocking story that brings in millions
of web views and television viewers, regardless of its validity. Many people who know of TMZ
or who are fans of TMZ will believe their stories, true or false due to namesake or loyalty.
Something like TMZ is only in fruition because of the change in communication technologies. In
modern America we live and abide by the internet, where TMZ finds its roots. TMZ will often
write untrue stories and get sued by the celebrities in question who the story was written about.
TMZ has also been known to go to major extreme levels of illegal activity to get a story, because
they know that even if they do face legal implications, they make enough money as a company to
simply pay their way out trouble.
The tabloid business can be an extremely profitable field of work for many people,

especially on the west coast where TMZ strives. There are even rumors of the company investing
in a drone in order to spy on celebrities further. These claims were rebutted, but in that sub-
industry if the price is right, the shoe fits. Other types of work in this vein that uses
communications technologies are reporters, paparazzi, and freelance paparazzi and reporters to
name a few. All of these different occupations of people have faced legal implications to some
degree due to their use of the ever growing and changing communication technologies.
A specific TMZ lawsuit example comes from April of 2013. TMZ reportedly placed
microphones in a Los Angeles courtroom in order to get an inside tabloid scoop. In the
courtroom was R&B singer Stevie Wonder who was suing a Mr. Alpha Walker for extortion. Mr.
Walker in turn sued TMZ. In this specific example, the suit doesn’t come from a celebrity but
from somebody with a connection of some sort to a celebrity. (Gardner, 2013)
On May 16, 2012 Walker was brought to court in a hearing related to his accused
extortion of Stevie Wonder. Walker’s attorney attested that he did not want the presence of media
in the courtroom in his client’s best interest. Apparently however, there were illicit microphones
on both the judge’s bench and behind books on both sides of the counsel table. Following the
revelation of this tech in the courtroom, “it was learned that these privileged communications
were instantaneously transferred to TMZ Enterprises.” According to the compliant, the judge had
allowed the microphones in the courtroom and the court’s staff was involved in the placement of
the mics. The judge in question had a different story saying that he was not aware of the
microphones, and that it will not happen again. The representative of the media at the hearing
appeared to be working for TMZ, but denied working for them. (Alpha Walker v. TMZ
Productions Inc et al, 2015)

What’s interesting is that the media is allowed to take part in court proceedings as long as
what they report on is on the record. (The differences and similarities between “not for
attribution,” and “off the record” is something that many journalists continue to struggle with
defining the meanings of.) However, if there are microphones in a court proceeding that don’t
stop recording or are not shut off or regulated by a technician and off the record material is
recorded, then that media outlet is suddenly stepping on illegal grounds. Those grounds are the
grounds by which TMZ was accused by Mr. Walker and how the suit could even happen.
TMZ along with ABC, CBS, and other media outlets were given clearance to come to the
court proceedings the day before the hearing, but of course that doesn’t include confidential
communications. They were given a lawsuit on the charges of wiretapping, invasion of privacy,
intentional infliction of emotional distress and eavesdropping on confidential communication.
Walker was seeking $100,000 in actual damages and an undisclosed amount in punitive
damages. This case was filed on March 29, 2013 and was terminated two months later on May
17, 2013. This means that either Walker backed down or TMZ paid him off, which is very well
possible. (Gardner, 2013)
A more recent TMZ case where a celebrity is actually suing the company personally is
from December 9, 2015. (Or at least that’s when it was granted a news story, courtesy of USA
Today) The plaintiff is Jared Leto who had starred in movies such Dallas Buyers Club and will
soon be in DC Comics Suicide Squad as the new Joker. He was also a singer for the band Thirty
Seconds to Mars. Leto filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against TMZ for publishing a
stolen and confidential video depicting Leto in an unwanted light. In the footage Leto is saying
rude things about Taylor Swift. The leaking of this video could also be seen as defamation of

character.
What’s surprising is that although TMZ had the stolen footage, it wasn’t up on the site
immediately. (It has since been added to the site.) The footage was sold to TMZ for two-thousand
dollars. According to the lawsuit, when TMZ demanded that the videographer sign a document
confirming he owned the footage, he refused and they used it anyway. It sounds like TMZ was
wizening up to the legal system after incidents like the microphone incident before deciding to
just do the opposite of the legal precautions they were pursuing.
Leto spoke on the issue saying “Let’s be clear. This was stolen footage. This was an
invasion of privacy. And it was both legally and morally wrong.” He also said “Everyone has the
right to privacy, especially in their own home. TMZ not only violated that right, it did so just to
improve its own bottom line. I have chosen to file this lawsuit not because I want to, but in hopes
it will encourage more people to stop trafficking in stolen goods, to follow proper legal
procedure.” Leto later apologized to Ms. Swift via Twitter thus utilizing another communication
technology employed by modern America. (Puente, 2015)
Branching away from all things TMZ and the extreme legal implications and lawsuits of
tabloids and paparazzi, many people use the review website Yelp. Yelp is a site where people can
go to speak positively or negatively on a business such as a restaurant, or concert venue.
However, business owners can fire back at reviewers in a legal manner by claiming libel if the
review is scathing enough. Libel is the questioning of a person’s character through the use of
written words and shouldn’t be confused with slander which is spoken, but essentially does the
same thing.
For example, Emily Fanelli, a Staten Island native was sued for one-thousand dollars for

her negative review on a flooring company out of Staten Island. Back in September of 2015, Ms.
Fanelli hired the flooring company, Mr. Sandless to come and refurnish the floors in her living
and dining rooms. Unfortunately Fanelli wasn’t pleased with the finished job and wasn’t pleased
with the “corrective actions” the company took after she complained about the flooring. When
this did nothing she took to the internet to warn other people and ended up on Yelp where she
referred to the business owner, Mr. Matt Gardiner as a scammer and con artist, as well as a liar,
and wrote that he robs customers. She later went on Yelp a second time to share these notions
again and this time she included her email address in order to steer business away from Gardiner.
The judge in charge of the case commented saying that her comments went well above
protective speech and opinion in the court. He rules that Fanelli must pay the one-thousand dollar
fine because “terms such as ‘scam,’ ‘con artist’ and ‘robs’ imply actions approaching criminal
wrongdoing rather than someone who failed to live up to the terms of a contract.” The judge also
remarked “They were personal in their incentive and were designed to impugn his integrity and
business practices with intent to damage his business reputation.” The first amendment can
protect against a lot of speech but when the specific line is crossed into libelous territory, it is
difficult to come back from that. Normally however, businesses do not sue for bad reviews that
obviously doesn’t discount it from being a possibility though.
As far as Fanelli is concerned she can still appeal and move on the higher court in order
to ensure that the job she received for he flooring doesn’t happen to somebody else. According to
her she plans to do just that. This case is important because as Americans we all have a voice and
presence online and this hits home because we all have bad experiences and in the 21st
century
most people do in fact write about these experiences on social media. It’s important to know that

yes we do have freedom of speech and we do have the means and will to communicate
effectively online; but that doesn’t mean we have unlimited protection. There are no shield laws
for everyday people and it’s not as if these laws would protect a journalist in this specific case as
well. Never drag personal opinions on owners and don’t even write or say anything (that is being
recorded) that even remotely questions a person’s character. Typically if one has to ask
themselves if what they are posting is okay to post, it’s not. Like earlier stated, these kinds of
things happen all the time and are rebutted with a public apology on the site where the comment
is or at the very least a reply from the business in question. A suing from company to consumer is
rare. (Andy Mai, 2015)
In the digital age, we have billions of files in our fingertips. Sometimes these files are
classified information depending on who we are and who we work for. A CIA operative for
example has clearance to certain files and these files can be problematic to the United States if
placed in the wrong hands. Back in June 2013, a gentleman by the name of Edward Snowden
was behind the most famous leak of confidential government files in the history of the nation.
Snowden has fled the United States since the leak, taking refuge in Russia but he does face
espionage charges due to the leak. The leak involved the sharing of media details of extensive
internet and phone surveillance by American intelligence. Snowden did this to help the American
people understand that they were being spied on by their own people but at what cost?
Following the leak and during the impending legal measures that are being taken upon
Snowden, he has gone to Russia where he was taken in. Snowden was a contractor for the CIA,
where he discovered the extensive measures the government were taking in order to spy on the
American people. Snowden took it upon himself to play hero and leaked this information firstly

to The Guardian newspaper, they reported that the US National Security Agency, also known as
the NSA, was collecting the telephone records of millions of Americans. Then The Guardian
published a secret court order directing the Verizon Company to hand over all of its telephone
data on a daily basis. Then the leak spread to the Washington Post who along with The Guardian
reported that the NSA were tapped directly into the servers of nine commonly used internet
firms such as Facebook, Microsoft, Yahoo, and even Google. Essentially this means that at this
moment they are watching the actual creation of this paper. They surveyed all of these outlets
with a program known as Prism. Finally, once the American public were shaken with the
revelations that they were being watched intently, The Guardian revealed it’s informant to be
none other than Edward Snowden.
On the shores of the United States Snowden has been charged with a slew of espionage
charges including theft of government property, unauthorized communication of national defense
information and willful communication of classified communications intelligence to an
unauthorized person. Several US politicians have also commented that what Snowden has done
is absolutely treason against the country. These are extremely serious offenses and Snowden
could never see the outside of a penitentiary.
Snowden has been in Moscow, Russia ever since he was revealed. Snowden arrived in
Moscow from Hong Kong and was headed to Cuba but before he could make it, the United
States cancelled his travel documents, and he was given temporary Asylum in Russia. This
means that he was allowed to live in the country on a temporary protection visa. He couldn’t
leave Russia however until last year when he was granted three more years in Russia and the
ability to travel for no longer than three months at a time. Obviously this wouldn’t include visits

home, due to the legal actions that would immediately be taken on Snowden post-landing.
(Snowden has said in multiple interviews that he does not regret what he did and that he would
gladly go to prison in the United States but that he has been debunked and rebutted.) If Snowden
chooses to he can stay in Russia for an additional three years until he hits five years in which he
could apply for Russia citizenship and become a full-fledged citizen.
This case is revolutionary within the realm of legal implications because Snowden has
outstanding charges. He is still a United States citizen but pursuing him against the UN’s wishes
could lead to a massive war. What he did has thus fallen into a grey area of the law. Many
American citizens praise Snowden for what he did, and international citizens in other nations feel
a similar way collectively. Was what Snowden did wrong? Legally yes. But morally and
ethically, it’s questionable. It remains to be seen whether or not he will answer for his crimes as
this case is still ongoing. (Edward Snowden: Leaks that exposed US spy programme, 2014)
Jumping back into the glamourous or maybe not so glamourous lives of public officials
legally effected by a misuse of technology are the victims of “Celebgate.” In late August of 2014,
almost 600 Apple iCloud accounts including those of celebrities were hacked into and their
contents, specifically nude photos of the people who were hacked were uploaded to the internet
for a mass audience. The incident has since been referred to as Celebgate, and “The Fappening.”
To backtrack for a moment, Apple products such as iPhones, iPads, iPods and Macs have the
ability to save a copy of everything that is saved on the devices to the “cloud,” which is basically
a satellite in space that serves as a mass USB flash drive for the consumer market. These copies
will remain even when the file is deleted off of the physical phone’s hard drive. Sometimes
regardless of whether the owner of the device is aware or not, their pictures will be sent to the

cloud when they take them. With sexting (sexual-texting) becoming a more and more prominent
aspect of communication in more recent years, it’s pretty clear to see where this is going.
The hack resulted in the posting of almost 500 pictures of various well-known public
figures including the likes of Jennifer Lawrence, Kaley Cuoco, Kirsten Dunst, and Hope Solo.
These photos were all posted to an internet forum called 4chan, and from there they spread
throughout the web. One of the advantages to living in a Web 2.0 age is that our exchange of
information digitally happens at the speed of light. This is also a huge disadvantage due to how
quickly information that people don’t want to get out can get out. Such was the case with the
leaked information in the Snowden case and the same can be applied to this case. (Mooney,
2015)
Apple Inc. reported promptly the next day that the photos were the resulted of a “targeted
attack” on their iCloud system. This resulted in an FBI investigation that has led to a dead end
and is currently ongoing. The FBI has revealed that it is believed that close to 2,500 iCloud
accounts were targeted in the hack. The hacker reached 572 accounts and these accounts were
accessed an average of six times each in order to get all of the pictures. Apple claims that it was
not at fault in this breach and that their security was sound and that it was a simple hacking of
account information that is to blame.
Nobody has been found guilty of committing Celebgate as of now and as such there have
been no charges placed upon anybody, including many of the suspects that the FBI has been
targeting. The perpetrator could face charges such as conspiracy, invasion of privacy, computer
fraud, email and wire fraud, and copyright infringement. Several celebrities, those who were
affected and those who weren’t alike, have commented on the scandal. Jennifer Lawrence who

has been the most vocal on the scandal said “I was just so afraid, I didn’t know how this would
affect my career.”
This could happen to anybody, and unfortunately as a celebrity, those kind of public
officials don’t have as many protective rights to help them in cases when their rights are intruded
on. This is why companies such as TMZ can do what they do. As a part of being in the public
eye, a tradeoff is giving up some protection power. However, should the culprit be caught, he
will face legal action. This proves that sometimes people will face legal implications for their use
of different communication technologies; it also proves that sometimes people don’t face any
legal implications for a number of reasons including taking refuge in another country. Finally, it
probes that sometimes technology has advanced to the point that it simply transcends legal
authority and the person responsible for the crime can technologically make it so that they are
exempted from legal implication. (Chicago Address Investigated in "Celebgate" Nude Photo
Hack: Report, 2015)
We can even pay for goods and services digitally with a credit card number or now with
an app. We can send money over Facebook or Snapchat. There is PayPal and Apple Pay, as well
as Samsung Pay. Just as the idea of computer hacking was discussed on a national scale with the
“Celebgate” scandal, so too can hacking happen on an international scale. When money and the
idea of fraudulent activity coming with our hard earned money comes into question, Americans
become very apprehensive. There are now entire card service departments at banks that fight
against hackers and work to stop fraudulent activity in its tracks because it has become so
commonplace.
In October, 2015 Samsung’s mobile payment system, Samsung Pay was questioned

because the benefactor company of Samsung Pay is LoopPay and LoopPay was hacked into.
Samsung released a statement that the incident involved three servers and as soon as the hack
was discovered security measures were taken to investigate and quarantine the servers. The
statement specified: ‘Samsung Pay was not impacted and at no point was any personal payment
information at risk. This was an isolated incident that targeted the LoopPay office network,
which is a physically separate network from Samsung Pay.”
The hackers in question were a group of government-affiliated Chinese hackers. It is
possible that this same group was behind the hacking attacks at Anthem, Premera Blue Cross and
the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. The breach of the Office of Personnel Management
involved the Chinese stealing personal information on millions of government employees, and is
credited as the worst act of cyberespionage ever done in opposition to the U.S. government. The
act itself is espionage in its most pure form, with the simple spying and acquiring of information
over the web. This is how most espionage is done in the modern era. Through the use of various
communication technologies. What’s an interesting point about the entire United States and
China web dispute is that President Obama and China’s President, Xi Jinping announced a pact
in September 2015 to start to crack down on cyberespionage.
That pact is the best legal action that can be taken against the hackers because the hackers
are not United States citizens. They fall out of the jurisdiction of legal measures, much like
Edward Snowden does currently. Unfortunately sometimes even though the hackers are known
to some degree they face no legal implications. The most interesting takeaway of the entire
cyberespionage crusade against the United States from China is that in the LoopPay case, the
hackers were not after the monetary information and wealth but rather the information on the

account holders, and the people affiliated with the company. (Min-Jeong Lee, 2015)
In the future, the lines of this issue are going to become more and more blurred and more
technology is introduced. In the introduction this is a reference to the “chip phone,” which is still
currently in development. An example that immediately comes to mind is if one of those can be
accessed by hackers. If a chip in the human body is compromised, then what could the legal
implications grow to past invasion of privacy or espionage for example? Could endangerment of
welfare come into play? What if the phone belongs to a minor? These questions are only growing
more and more complicated as time passes and technology evolves.
A good notion to reference in regards to this idea is the question of what or rather whom
is a journalist in the modern era? Somebody with access to social media? Did Ms. Fancelli’s
review on Yelp make her a critic? Does TMZ’s sometimes false gossip-based antics make them
journalists? Should these people be prosecuted and tried as such? The question list grows bigger
and bigger daily and amendments have to keep being made to the Constitution and the law at
large in order to facilitate this list.
Technologically, we the human race, have never made as many advancements as we are
now nor as quickly. By the end of the year the first virtual reality augmentation devices will be
on the consumer market, and what those are even capable of is yet another question without an
answer. The first time somebody does something questionable in virtual reality, there will be
some kind of lawsuit. Who knows what kind of effect wearing those glasses or headsets
continually will have on the body? A new set of laws will have to be made to fight back against
this.
We can communicate faster than we ever have been able to before through the use of

email, Twitter, Facebook, the cloud, etc. We can be in the same room with friends, family and
even stranger’s miles away with a video chat. We carry around computers in our pockets, ready
to communicate at any time. There are so many facets to communication technology, so many
different areas that can be discussed.
The law is a very large entity. The number of legal implications that can be taken against
someone isn’t quite infinite but the list is quite long. In the future, this list will undoubtedly keep
growing in order to cover all the bases and all of the possible outcomes that could be a result of
misuse of communication technology and all of the privileges that come with it.
The first amendment protects our freedom of speech and our freedom of expression. We
live in an age where people are generally more outspoken than in the past and a lot of people feel
they are entitled to something. Many times they don’t even know what that something is. This is
seen most affluently on social media and sometimes abuse their first amendment rights, which
was what we saw in the Yelp discussion piece. Truthfully, it can be inferred that our first
amendment rights are lower than ever and this has a lot to do with people thinking less
“absolutionst” and more modern day democratic. Free speech is the amendment which sees the
legal implications mentioned throughout this piece the most often for the reasons explained
above.
Finally, as far as international legal implications are concerned as viewed with Edward
Snowden and the Chinese hackers, the fact that these perpetrators are untouched may change in
the future. Something to take note of in these two examples though, is that both cases reached
standstills in Communist nations as opposed to somewhere like England here it’s possible
charges could have been pressed. With America being as opposed to Communism as it is and

Russia housing Snowden, no questions asked for example, it is a plausible notion that legal
implications could perhaps happen in other nations. They would obviously have to be divulged
out by the other nations in question but this is a moot point for now and is only the center of this
speculation. It certainly I something to think about, however.
Part V: My Future & What I Will Use & My Gratifications
With exactly two weeks until graduation from today’s publication date, I am pursuing a
career in my discipline of choice: public relations. I know without a doubt that I will be using
social media because it is the future. Social media, Twitter especially is so beneficial to anyone
in the Communications field but more so to a PR person, because it keeps us on the uptake as far
as news and trends. In putting the uses & gratifications approach elements to the test with my
own professional career, social media and virtual reality technology will allow me to: explore my
psychological and social environment, and attribute my experience as to why I’ll be using these
technologies most heavily. (That doesn’t discount computer software or email, however. Email is
still currently my second most used technology, personally.) My needs and motives to
communicate as a communication professional will be fulfilled with the content/media I am
creating and distributing. My attitudes and expectations about the content/media I create will be
a large component of the work as well as possible alternatives to using the content/media. This is
all a proprietary of my communications behavior and the outcomes of that behavior.
As far as this research is concerned the original five research questions were:
1.) What technologies do specific communication practitioners use? (Journalists, broadcast
journalists, PR professionals, media production personnel, etc.)
2.) How are these technologies used effectively?

3.) What are some up and coming and technologies coming soon to the communications
world?
4.) What legal issues can these professionals find when using certain technologies?
5.) As a young professional getting ready to take on the world, what technologies will I use
personally?
All five have been answered fully and completely and truly accentuate the uses and
gratifications approach and what communication technologies each discipline uses daily and
why. The research within this thesis has taken weeks to complete and may be touch upon in the
future and modified as technology continues to grow and make our jobs easier.
Appendix I: Survey Questions & Results

Appendix II: Interview Questions & Results
(For the purposes of this part of my research, I conducted interviews over email with various
practitioners and used the same questions for each of the three to compare and contrast
responses.)
1. What is your current position?
2. How long have you been in this position?
3. What is the technology that you use most daily?
4. How does that specific technology benefit (gratify) you?
5. What technology do you wish you used more/were more proficient with?
6. What do you think the “next big” technology is?
7. Anything else to add regarding technology & communications?
Results
Interviewee 1 (Journalism): Wanted to Remain Anonymous
1. I am a beat reporter for The Buffalo News.
2. I have been in this position for just about 4 years.
3. MY COMPUTER. I do literally everything on there. I also rely heavily on email to send
stories, receive information, conduct interviews, and more. Email is the big one.
4. I need my computer to do my job. I’m a writer, and a computer is my instrument. I mean, it’s
not like we can use typewriters anymore, so this is it.
5. Honestly, production equipment. There will be times when I have to use equipment out in the
field and I have no idea how to use it. I have lost some great files/interviews that way. That’s the
problem with many news outlets, they don’t cross-train, and there’s not enough of us who know
how to operate things.

6. The next big technology is definitely wearable technology, and that includes virtual reality
devices, like the Samsung VR.
7. Great topic!
Interviewee 2 (Media Production): Ken Cosentino – CEO of White Lion Studios
1. I’m a filmmaker and I’m the head of White Lion Studios, based in Niagara Falls, N.Y.
2. I started the company seven years ago.
3. For me, I have to use a lot of production equipment. We’ve got cameras on deck, lights, sound
equipment, but I am also a huge fan of social media and YouTube.
4. Without production equipment, there would be no production, no movies, no us. We rely on
our equipment and it is the backbone of everything we do.
5. I wish I was more proficient with social media, if you remember that’s why I brought you on
as our social media intern, we NEEDED you.
6. I really, truly honestly believe the next great technology is virtual reality and holographic
imaging, obviously I want it to be something that can benefit my company, and that might be just
the ticket.
7. The two go hand-in-hand. Without one, there isn’t the other, not anymore.
Interviewee 3 (Public Relations): Kevin Manne – PRSA Buffalo/Niagara President
1. As you know, I am the current President of PRSA Buffalo/Niagara and the Assistant Director
of Communications at the UB (University at Buffalo) School of Management.
2. I’ve been in my current position since 2012.
3. Social media and email are everything in our field. You know that. I’m on social media every
day and I live by my Gmail account.
4. Social media keeps me up on trends, lets me see what my colleagues are up to, allows for
instant communication and feedback, and email allows me to talk to anyone instantly in a relaxed
setting.
5. I’m not as proficient in social media as I need to be, but I’m working on it.

6. Virtual reality, it’s here and it’s only going to grow.
7. I have watched the communications field grow with technology. The two are tethered together.
Appendix III: References
Pierson-Smith, Anne. Bhatia, Vijay J. Bremner, Stephen Jones, Rodney H. (2010) Creative
English and public relations in Hong Kong
Bennett, W. L. (2012). News: The Politics of Illusion, 9th Edition. Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press.
Jennings Bryant, M. B. (2009). Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research, 3rd Edition.
Routledge.
Ruggiero, T. E. (2000). Uses and Gratifications Theory in the 21st Century . El Paso: University
of Texas at El Paso.
Ballard, C. L. (2011). "What's Happening" @Twitter: A USES AND GRATICATIONS
APPROACH. University of Kentucky.
Riley, C. (2015, January 30). Banned! 8 things you won't find in China. Retrieved from CNN
Money: http://money.cnn.com/gallery/technology/2014/12/30/banned-china-8/3.html
Alpha Walker v. TMZ Productions Inc et al. (2015). Retrieved from PacerMonitor:
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/1309809/Alpha_Walker_v_TMZ_Productions
_Inc_et_al
Andy Mai, D. G. (2015, September 23). EXCLUSIVE: Staten Island woman ordered to pay
$1,000 fine for bashing floor refinishing business on Yelp. Retrieved from NY Daily
News: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/s-woman-pay-1g-fine-bashing-business-
yelp-article-1.2370681
Chicago Address Investigated in "Celebgate" Nude Photo Hack: Report. (2015, June 10).
Retrieved from 5 NBC Chicago: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Chicago-
Address-Investigated-in-Celebgate-Hack-Report-306754921.html
Don Pember, C. C. (2014). Mass Media Law (19th Edition). McGraw-Hill Education.
Edward Snowden: Leaks that exposed US spy programme. (2014, January 17). Retrieved from
BBC News: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-23123964

Gardner, E. (2013, April 2). TMZ Sued for Placing Hidden Microphones in a Courtroom.
Retrieved from The Hollywood Reporter: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-
esq/tmz-sued-placing-hidden-microphones-432279
Johnson, M. A. (2015, June 2015). Almost 600 Accounts Breached in 'Celebgate' Nude Photo
Hack, FBI Says. Retrieved from NBC News: http://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/pop-
culture-news/almost-600-accounts-breached-celebgate-nude-photo-hack-fbi-says-
n372641
Min-Jeong Lee, J. C. (2015, October 7). Samsung Says Personal Payment Information Not at
Risk. Retrieved from Wall Street Journal: http://www.wsj.com/articles/samsung-says-
personal-payment-information-not-at-risk-1444273037
Mooney, P. (2015, June 9). Emilio Herrera's Home Searched: Reations of Ceebrity Nude Photo
Victims Kate Upton, Jennifer Lawrence, Christina Hendricks, Amber Heard, and More.
Retrieved from Inquisitr: http://www.inquisitr.com/2158593/emilio-herreras-home-
searched-reactions-of-celebrity-nude-photo-victims-kate-upton-jennifer-lawrence-
christina-hendricks-amber-heard-and-more/
Puente, M. (2015, December 9). Jared Leto sues TMZ over 'stolen' video . Retrieved from USA
Today: http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2015/12/09/jared-leto-sues-tmz-over-
stolen-video/77063540/
Signed: Zackary Thomas Reese

COM 450 Final

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Destacado

Destacado (16)

Similar a COM 450 Final

Similar a COM 450 Final (20)

Más de Zack Reese

Más de Zack Reese (11)

COM 450 Final