Jump to content

User:Ian.Tompkins12

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Right to Privacy

[edit]

Journalism

[edit]

Publication of Private Facts

[edit]

Publication of private facts speaks of the newsworthiness of private facts according to the law and the protections that private facts have[1]. If a fact has significant newsworthiness to the public, it is protected by law under the freedom of the press. However, even if the fact is true, if it is not newsworthy, it is not necessarily protected. Digital Media Law Project uses examples such as sexual orientation, HIV status, and financial status to show that these can be publicly detrimental to the figure being posted about[1]. The problem arises from the definition of newsworthiness.

Newsworthy

[edit]

According to Digital Media Law Project, the courts will usually side with the press in the publication of private facts[1]. This helps to uphold the freedom of the press in the US constitution. “…there is a legitimate public interest in nearly all recent events, as well as in the private lives of prominent figures such as movie stars, politicians, and professional athletes”[1]. Digital Media Law Project supports these statements with citations to specific cases. While most recent events and prominent figures are considered newsworthy, it cannot go too far and too deep with a morbid curiosity[1]. The media gain a lot of leverage once a person becomes a prominent figure and many things about their lives become newsworthy. Multiple cases such as Strutner v. Dispatch Printing Co., 442 N.E.2d 129 (Ohio Ct. App. 1982)[2] show that the publication of a person’s home address and full name who is being questioned by the police is valid and “a newsworthy item of legitimate public concern.” The last part to consider is whether this could be considered a form of doxxing. With the court upholding the newspapers right to publish, this is much harder to change in the future. Newsworthiness has much around it that is help up by court rulings and case law. This is not in legislation but is created through the courts, as many other laws and practices are. These are still judged on a case by case basis as they are often settled through a lawsuit of some form[1]. While there is a fair amount of case law supporting newsworthiness of subjects, it is hardly comprehensive and, news publications can publish things not covered and defend themselves in court for their right to publish these facts.  

Protection of Minors

[edit]

United Kingdom

[edit]

Laws and courts in the UK hold up the protection of minors in the journalistic space. The Independent Press Standards Organisation(IPSO) in the UK have shown that the usage of footage of a 12 year old girl being bullied in 2017 can be retroactively taken down due to dears of cyber-bullying and potential harm done to the child in the future[3]. This was after the Mail Online published the video without any attempt to hide the identity of the child. Following the newsworthiness point, it is possible that content like this would be allowed in the United States due to the recentness of the event[1]. Protection of minors is a different matter in the United States with new stories about minors doing certain things and their faces are shown in a news publication. The Detroit Free Press, as an example, chose to do a hard-hitting story about prostitution and drugs from a teenager but never named her or showed her face, only referring to her and the “16-year-old from Taylor”[4]. In the UK, During the case of Campbell v MGN, Lord Hope stated that the protection of minors will be handled on a case by case basis and affected by the child’s awareness of the photo and their expectation of privacy[3]. Many factors will be considered such as the age of the children, activity, usage of real names, etc[3].

United States

[edit]

The protection of minors and children in the United States often falls on the shoulders of The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)[5]. This protects any children under the age of 13 from the collection of their data without the parent’s or guardian’s permission. This law is the reason why many sites will ask if you are under 13 or require you to be 13 in order to sign up. While this law is good for protecting children’s information, it fails to protect the information of anyone older than 13. It also begins to overlap with other privacy protection laws such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA).

  1. ^ a b c d e f g "Publication of Private Facts". Digital Media Law Project. Retrieved 28 November 2019.
  2. ^ "Strutner v. Dispatch Printing Co., 442 N.E.2d 129 (Ohio Ct. App. 1982)". Court Listener. Retrieved 27 November 2019.
  3. ^ a b c Morris; Brigit; Davies, Maire (1 February 2018). "Can Children's Privacy Rights Be Adequately Protected through Press Regulation? What Press Regulation Can Learn from the Courts". Journal of Media Law. 10 (no. 1): 92 - 113. doi:10.1080/17577632.2018.1467597. {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); |issue= has extra text (help)
  4. ^ Kovanis, Georgea. "She Was Prostituting, Pregnant, Doing Drugs by 14. Now, Taylor Girl Fights to Save Her Own Life". Detroit Free Press. Detroit Free Press. Retrieved 27 November 2019.
  5. ^ "Children's Protection". Federal Trade Commisson. Federal Trade Commission. Retrieved 9 December 2019.