The about-face in characterization of the press during Justice Scalia's three decades on the Court is worthy of a discussion about its underlying causes and also a discussion about its potential effects. As I have noted elsewhere, both the explanations for the shift and the possible ramifications of it are complex and multifaceted. Scalia's push for a new, less positive depiction of the press came at a time when the institutional press experienced significant change and its reputation among the American public plummeted-suggesting that Justice Scalia (and, ultimately, his colleagues on the Court) were merely being perceptive observers of the new media reality, "[m]apping [their] views onto more widely held societal views that the press is no longer valuable or laudable" and reflecting in their opinions the growing consensus that "the modem-day press, in its day-to-day operations, is not doing a good job of being press-like in the constitutional sense." But the reversal from positive to skeptical depictions by the Court is noteworthy, no matter its cause, both because of its likely impact on the institutional press and because of the potential that it will impact wider First Amendment rights.
15 First Amend. L. Rev. 258, 287 (2017)