{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01888772298006296, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.36, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Supreme Court, the First Amendment, and Bad Journalism

The First Amendment's guarantees of freedom of the press and freedom of speech do not purport to set standards for the news media. In interpreting the First Amendment, however, the Supreme Court has played a significant role in setting the legal framework for journalistic practice. Everything from the reporter's use of confidential sources to the protection of her files from police search, from her access to government proceedings and institutions to her potential iability for infringing upon rights of privacy and reputation have been the subject of the Court's First Amendment jurisprudence. Indeed, the Court's decisions have covered much of the full range of the journalistic enterprise. Despite this extensive involvement, the Court generally has not considered how its decisions affect the standards of journalistic practice. At one level, this is perfectly understandable-the Court