Skip to main content

Fewer than a third of Americans know Supreme Court rulings are final

Most Americans know little about the workings of the U.S. Supreme Court, including the fact that Supreme Court rulings are final, according to a national survey conducted for the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center. The findings are being released today in advance of Constitution Day, Monday, September 17. When asked “if a person

APPC Researchers Urge for More Effective Cigarette Warning Labels

Today’s Philadelphia Inquirer features an op-ed in favor of the adoption of Canadian-style cigarette warning labels in the U.S. Such large, graphic warning labels are more effective, argue Professor Paul Slovic of the University of Oregon and APPC scholars Dan Romer and Kathleen Hall Jamieson, authors of the op-ed. The authors cite their research, published earlier this year in Nicotine & Tobacco Research, suggesting that graphic warnings

Another prize for FactCheck.org

FactCheck.org has won a Clarion Award from the Association for Women in Communications. The prize, given in the online media category, recognizes FactCheck’s 2006 election coverage. It will be presented in October at the Association for Women in Communications’ annual conference in Orlando, Florida. Earlier this year, FactCheck.org won two Webby “People’s Voice” awards in

ARCI Partner Wins Telly Award for HIV-Testing Ad

A public service announcement that promotes HIV awareness to young African-Americans has been awarded a silver Telly Award – the top award given by the Tellys – in an international competition honoring video productions and commercials. The ad, which sends the message that anyone can be affected and that no one is immune, was produced by MEE Productions Inc. of

FactCheck Scores Again

For the second year in a row, Annenberg Political Fact Check (www.factcheck.org) has been included among the 25 Sites We Can’t Live Without by Time.com. FactCheck “is an independent, nonpartisan effort to cut through the routine spin and dissembling of politicians and other public figures,” noted Time. “Staff writers check speeches, TV ads, news releases

Judicial Campaigns: Money, Mudslinging and an Erosion of Public Trust

Thirty-nine states elect their judges in some fashion. What once were “sleepy little affairs,” judicial campaigns have become high-stakes races, drawing in big money and increasingly negative advertising campaigns. In 2006, an estimated $16 million was spent on advertising in supreme court races in 10 states, a record. If predictions hold true, contests in 2008

Americans overwhelmingly favor election of judges but disapprove of judicial campaign fund-raising, fearing it affects fairness

Nearly two-thirds, 65 percent, of Americans prefer electing their judges rather than having governors nominate them from a list prepared by a nonpartisan committee. Yet when judges run for office they usually have to raise money for their election campaigns. Seven in 10 Americans believe that the necessity to raise campaign funds will affect a