Case study 5.3 Q3&Q4
If corporate personhood is taken into account then yes a corporation should have the same First Amendment protection as an individual. " The basis for allowing corporations to assert protection under the U.S. Constitution is that they are organizations of people, and the people should not be deprived of their constitutional rights when they act collectively (Bradley 2011)." If the purpose of the commercial is to promote a product negatively or to falsely advertise a product with previous knowledge of such an act being committed then the Company shall be held accountable as would an individual under the First Amendment rights. When a company offers commercial speech or political speech is is how to the same standards as individuals with the same rights and responsibilities. With the difference between commercial and political being taken into account. Thus if a company is found to be lying about financial situations then the company should be sued. For example if a company puts out a commercial saying that its product is better than the rest that is a matter of opinion but if it puts out a commercial stating that its company does not participate in unlawful or immoral acts then that is a matter of fact and should be protected. as stated in the case study used for Nike in the book if come if companies are not protected by the First Amendment right by the government they will be less likely to speak on public issues pertaining to the company.
Whether or not commercial should have the same First Amendment rights as an individual is a matter of opinion on whether or not the company of the commercial Should also be a group has the same First Amendment rights as an individual.
as stated in the question previously if you are looking at a corporation as a person Or group of persons then the corporation should have the same rights as the individual. Adversely, I do not believe that...