Art Threats and First Amendment Disruption

The novel problem of art threats, typified by threatening rap lyrics, has destabilized our First Amendment regime. We have traditionally relied on industry gatekeepers like music labels or museum curators to determine what counts as art. However, with the advent of the Internet, amateur artists can...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Kerr, Andrew Jensen (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Buch
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: 2021
In:Jahr: 2021
Online-Zugang: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866330985
003 DE-627
005 20250113054907.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231019s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866330985 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866330985 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Kerr, Andrew Jensen  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Art Threats and First Amendment Disruption 
264 1 |c 2021 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a The novel problem of art threats, typified by threatening rap lyrics, has destabilized our First Amendment regime. We have traditionally relied on industry gatekeepers like music labels or museum curators to determine what counts as art. However, with the advent of the Internet, amateur artists can share their aesthetic output with a public audience, bypassing the threshold quality control work of the Art World. This has forced courts to acknowledge foundational questions about what kind of art is covered by the First Amendment. In brief, it covers “good” art. In this paper I offer a synthetic conception of the First Amendment that contextualizes this aesthetic gatekeeper problem within a freedom of speech doctrine that has been forced to distinguish art from threat. I echo the claims of law and rap scholars that the amateur attempt at rap should be interpreted within a permissive standard for political speech, but I remind this scholarly network that our category of art speech still connotes a threshold level of quality. Young artists need help with self-editing; they do not need to be punished. But this does not mean the amateur attempt at art should be reified as good art within our constitutional law doctrine. I thus consider some pragmatic solutions for how either civil society or the state can mirror the essential quality control work done by prior Art World actors. My thinking is informed by a noble understanding of rap as well as the cultural assumptions that explain the boundaries of the First Amendment 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/395355763.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4392976718 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866330985 
LOK |0 005 20231019043705 
LOK |0 008 231019||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE40841622 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw