PRIVACY AND FREEDOM OF THE PRESS IN THE AGE OF NEW MEDIA
The debate between privacy and the media is not new. The interrelation between the two has been discussed by many scholars as well as the courts across many jurisdictions. A recent US court decision valuing Hulk Hogan’s privacy over freedom of the press in the Gawker case has given a fresh stimulus to this on-going debate in the context of internet media. This decision calls for a review of the notion that privacy rights conflict with freedom of the press, especially in cases involving a celebrity or a public figure. The media, while exercising its freedom of the press, under appropriate circumstances, can publish private information of celebrities if it is newsworthy or in the public interest. However, with the advent of invasive journalism and popular internet culture, characterization of media, or even a celebrity, has become gradually difficult. Privacy rights is an essential component of freedom of speech, but in cases where the former are in question, freedom of the press cannot be equated with
…show more content…
It is often believed that privacy is in conflict with free speech, but that is not the case. Privacy, on the other hand, is an essential element required to exercise freedom of speech. People will not be able to communicate freely if they have even the slightest fear of public disclosure of private facts and thereby causing a chilling effect on free speech. However, the later part of the essay argues that individual privacy and freedom of the press are at loggerheads. This typically happens when the media publishing about the private life of a celebrity leads to a controversy. Nevertheless, even in the presence of such a conflict, it is not advisable to limit privacy rights to give way for freedom of the press, as that would seriously hamper individual autonomy and
Merry had access to a client’s confidentially information. We do not know how Merry is going to use the information learned about the prominent public figure. The information Merry had access to can be damaging to the client public image. This affects the well-being of the client. The therapist’s inability to maintain confidentiality affects the beneficence of the client.
Scott P, Media FR. OPINION: Candid photos ethical dilemma in internet age. 2014. 4.
The films The Nine Lives of Marion Barry and Anita, contribute to history in allowing us to go back in the past to see how we as a society chose how to handle scandals, which creates certain expectation and set boundaries during the era in which they occurred. With this information, we can then redefine the differences between events in the past and compare them today. For example, Barry was elected into office countless times after countless drug scandals surfaced about his coke addition, yet Anita Hill’s reputation was destroyed after she accused Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment. Many would consider this to be great injustice, resulting in confusion. As a result, the media plays such an important role in helping us understand and in showing how some scandals are very specific to time, place, and culture which is why people react differently to them.
Notoriety a Modern Myth High profile court cases have been getting increasingly popular as time goes on. Court cases like the Casey Anthony and Scott Peterson trials are media dynamite. Although the media is legally allowed to be a part of these court proceedings, they still cause drama and stipulations that many feel would not be a factor if their presence were withdrawn. Notoriety, or being famous for bad deeds, is a characteristic engulfing many of Hollywood’s elite personnel; for this reason, many high profile cases have become even more of a media magnet. Many may believe that notoriety is a determining factor in high profile cases, but all legal proceedings are conducted in the same manner whether heavily documented in the
However, in the case of Sullivan, the Supreme Court ruled that there is a difference between public and private figures. In a public figure, an individual decides to tell the media about themselves, therefore they cannot sue if the media makes jokes. On the other hand, there is a private figure, which is an individual who has not told anyone about himself or herself, therefore they can sue the media if they make jokes. This will fix the issue of misusing the media. Lastly, a pro can be that everyone has the right so send information that might seem important to others.
Censorship violates anonymity and makes people not want to speak without fear. Many believe that censorship is helpful. ”In Pros and Cons of Censorship” by Prabhakar Pillai
Nowadays, “privacy” is becoming a popular conversation topic. Many people believe that if they do not do anything wrong in the face of technology and security, then they have nothing to hide. Professor Daniel J. Solove of George Washington University Law School, an internationally known expert in privacy law, wrote the article Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide’, published in The Chronicle of Higher Education in May of 2011. Solove explains what privacy is and the value of privacy, and he insists that the ‘nothing to hide’ argument is wrong in this article. In the article, “Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide’”, Daniel J. Solove uses ethos, pathos, and logos effectively by using strong sources, using
Without freedom of the press discussions cannot reach a wider audience, debate is obstructed,
Freedom of the press means, “immunity from previous restraints or
The “Nothing-to-Hide Argument” Analyzed: In this rhetorical analysis, I will be taking a look at Daniel J. Solove’s essay “The Nothing-to-Hide Argument,” which is about privacy in the context of personal information and government data collection (Solove 734). Solove’s main argument in his essay is that the general public has a narrow perception of what privacy really is. The purpose behind his main argument is to expose the problems with the nothing-to-hide argument while presenting a way to challenge it for his target audience, government officials. Solove’s argument to his target audience is effective through his exemplary use of substance, organization, and style in his essay.
Censorship of The First Amendment This paper will discuss how censorship denies citizens of the United States our full rights as delineated in the First Amendment. It will outline how and why the first amendment was created and included in the Constitution of the United States of America. This paper will also define censorship, discuss a select few legal cases surrounding freedom of speech and censorship as well as provide national and local examples of censorship.
Freedom of expression is one of the laws the forefathers of America made to empower its citizens and also enables them to live in peace amongst themselves. In most countries around the world, freedom of expression does not exist, so there is always war in those countries. In the article “Why the First Amendment (and Journalism) Might Be in Trouble”, the authors, Ken Dautrich, chair of the Public Policy at the University of Connecticut and John Bare, who is the vice president for strategic planning and evaluation at the Arthur M. Blank Family foundation in Atlanta, conducted a research study on the importance of freedom of speech. They used their research findings to support freedom of expressions. They employed claim of policy, claim of fact and also appeal to pathos and logos in their argument of the importance of the freedom of speech.
The freedoms of speech and of press are quintessential American rights, afford to it’s citizens through the ratification of the first amendment on December 15, 1791. These rights protect the voices of minority's, inform citizens, preserve the truth and create a watchdog for government corruption. Although these rights are toted in high esteem by most Americans, most are unaware these freedoms are not absolute and poses limitations. Such limitations sometimes include speech that criticizes the government. Throughout American history freedom of expression seem to be treated
Censorship in America can vary between the silencing of young voices and the prevention of exposing others of inappropriate material. Many people are afraid of losing their freedom of speech, as first amendment rights should be mandatory for American citizens. Polar to this argument insists the importance of censorship, as it can shield the public from information that can lead to fear or chaos. Leaving students ignorant to world problems, however, is argued by Sonja West that it removes their first amendment rights and creates a future working-class of Americans who are clouded from the truth. West is a law professor at the University of Georgia who is distinguished for her expertise in the first amendment law and minor in journalism.
An Argumentative Essay on Media Censorship Censorship is a control over unacceptable sources found in all forms of media: such as, newspapers, television, and the Internet. Censorship in the media is to examine all the information found in the media, and deleting or censoring anything that is considered objectionable to the state. Each country controls their own media depending on their religious beliefs, culture and moral ideas. There are many reasons to why censorship of the media is a disadvantage. Governments love to control their nations, and a way of controlling their ideas is by censoring information, which citizens have every human right to access.