On the premise that legal research in mass communication should be scientific and grounded in theory based upon available knowledge about how the world works, it is argued in this paper that the research paradigm used by most communication-law scholars is inadequate. In the first section of the paper the current, "institution-centered" paradigm that structures most communication-law scholars' teaching and research is described. The argument of the second part of the paper points out some of the major flaws of this paradigm--its focus on legal rules and the institutions that make them fail to account for factors that are vitally important to understanding the reality of legal disputes. This section also outlines an alternative "disputes focuses" paradigm to replace or complement the current one. In the third section of the paper some theoretical and methodological implications of this paradigm shift are discussed. (HTH)