Differences between libel and invasion of privacy << know them!!
Public records are not invasion of privacy, no matter how long ago the record was..recorded.
Retrospectives: if you're gonna dredge up old news..there better be a good public interest to justify it.
(under revealing personal private facts)
Offensive Material
* If it is determined private facts received publicity, a court then asks:
1. Is the material offensive to a reasonable person, not someone who is overly sensitive?
2. Is the published material of legitimate public concern?
What is a legitimate public concern?
a. How much public interest or importance is there in the material?
b. How deeply do these facts intrude into an individual’s privacy?
c. How public or private is the individual in the story?
Ethics and Privacy
Ethics Code of the Society for Professional Journalists (SPJ):
“Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm and discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.”
Journalists should “show good taste,” and “avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.”
Recounting the Past
* Two kinds of lawsuits arise about the past:
1. A news story, book or TV documentary that simply recounts the past
2. “Where they are now” stories; pushes beyond history
Private Facts on the Internet
The disclosure of private facts on the Internet is treated by the courts in the same
way as publication in a newspaper
"I could just dream..I don't care if it was a beach or a mental institution!"
3. Intrusion
(placing yourself into someone else's business)
Taking pictures from street of man beating his wife..(so hypothetical)
-Trespass
-Eavesdropping to overhear a conversation
-Gathering personal information from an individual’s private records (a biggie is medical records)
-Using a telephoto lens
Child star, growing up and getting busted for crack & drugs:
"Is he intentionally back in the news? No, he's just an idiot"
No Privacy in Public
-There is no expectation of privacy in public
-Anything visible or audible by any person in the vicinity is public, not private
-No expectation of privacy in places where people gather
Hidden Recording Devices
Ethical guidelines for when to use hidden recording devices:
-Information is of profound importance
-All other alternatives exhausted
-Apply excellence needed to pursue the story fully
-Harm prevented outweighs harm caused by the deception
-Journalists involved have conducted a meaningful, collaborative and deliberative decision to justify deception
TN – One person must know about recording
Publication of Information Obtained Illegally
Journalists can use illegally gathered material given them
Journalists cannot use information they have obtained illegally
Intrusion and the Internet
No expectation of privacy when information voluntarily made accessible
4. False Light Privacy
Made public
About the plaintiff
Substantially false
A woman was walking out of a funhouse and a photographer took a picture.. it wasn't libel because that's what she looked like.. but it was offensive to a reasonable person & totally humiliated.
Illegal to publicize material that places an individual in a false light if:
1. offensive to a reasonable person (embarrassment is enough) and
2. The publisher of the material was at fault when the publication was made
In rules of journalism & photography:
"Yeah, I'd be careful doing any 'Hooker in High school' stories.."
Comparisons to libel
False light and Libel both require level of falsity
Libel must damage reputation
False light can merely cause embarrassment/humiliation
Distortion:
Most common false light claim against media.
information is omitted OR
information is used out of context
Fictionalization
The purposeful distortion of the truth for dramatic purposes
Minor Falsehoods
* Most false light cases result from:
Simple editing or writing errors, and/or
Misuse of photographs and video
Obvious falsehoods
Hard to win if comment is obviously false
The Fault Requirement
Plaintiffs required to prove actual malice in false light cases involving issues of public importance.
DEFENSES (used by the media):
First Amendment - right to publish information of public interest.
newsworthiness
consent – implied/explicit
(Truth is not always a defense in a false light case)
5. Emotional Distress and Personal Injury:
New area beyond defamation and invasion of privacy. Not tested.
courts have stated that plaintiffs can claim this:
. . .when another’s conduct is “so outrageous in character and extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.”
Intentional Infliction of emotional distress. Can possibly prove intention harm.-conduct was intentional or reckless
-conduct was extreme and outrageous
-conduct caused the plaintiff emotional distress
-emotional distress was severe
Supreme Court requires for a claim of Intentional infliction of emotional distress:
1. that the information be stated as fact, not opinion
2. that it is a false statement of fact
3. that the person writing or making the statement knew it was false, or exhibited reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the material.
In other words. . .now, even for Emotional distress must demonstrate actual malice.
Fictionalization
Time (Life Magazine) v. Hill
Absolute Privilege & Qualified Privilege
Absolute Privilege - the info was presented in a protected environment. "They heard me (falsely) accuse the defendant of being the murderer" You can reported because you were in the context of an official legal proceeding: during a case in a courtroom.
Qualified Privilege: Reporting on anything that happens in a legal proceeding. (but can't editorialize)
Neutral Reportage: a usually reliable source screws up.
Right of Reply:
what kind of access does a person have to replay to Oprah's negative comment about you.
No comments:
Post a Comment