Chapter 6 of the textbook poses the question as to whether it is a violation of privacy to record and publish private recordings without the knowledge, or consent, of all of the parties involved. This question has been a matter of media ethics and law since the means to record audio or video has existed. This question is increasingly pertinent as incidents of non-consensual publishing of recorded activities continues to increase, due to the technological means to make recordings becoming easier, cheaper, and more discreet.
People, based on their stature and role in society, should have different sets of legal expectations for privacy. In all cases, short of criminal acts, persons who fall into the category of truly private citizens should be protected from discreet, non-consensual recording practices. However, persons who fall into the category of public citizens in some fashion, meaning their actions have impact in the public sphere, should have less expectations for privacy legally, and should not be legally protected from being recorded without their consent. When an individual rises to a place in life where their actions fall within the public interest, or they accept such a role, they should be expected to surrender some degree of privacy in return for increased public influence. …show more content…
A politician secretly recorded in unethical conduct, such as former Louisiana Congressman Vance McAllister, who was exposed to be engaging in an extramarital affair in 2014, due to a leaked surveillance video from a staffer that was published by the media, should not have the same expectation of privacy due to his role as a Congressman. It was not a violation of his privacy for the media to publish that tape. Likewise, the secretly recorded racist conversations of NBA franchise owner Donald Sterling that were leaked to the media, are also not a violation of privacy. This is due to Sterling’s role in the public sphere, and the stature of the NBA making the tapes a public matter. The fallout that Sterling experienced, resulting in him having to sell the Clippers, was appropriate and he should not have legal recourse against the tapes. In this country, we are blessed to have robust protections for free speech and the press compared to other nations, and a healthy free speech environment. While shaming or punishing those who truly seek to be private citizens with private lives is inappropriate, those who take an outsized role in the public, and build up a public persona, expose themselves to criticism. In the cases of Sterling, Congressman McAllister, and others, they should have thought about their actions and not taken them in the first place, rather than lashing out because they got caught Whether the space is public or private, I support and defend the media and interest groups rights to record and publish actions and conversations without the consent of the persons involved, as long as there is a public interest in doing so. …show more content…
When it comes to the issue of edited recordings or videos however, libel laws should have some impact. It’s one thing to publish conversations without consent, it’s another to manipulate, or doctor, information to present a misleading and biased story that can have harmful, inaccurate, and libelous impact. The media should still be able to publish these edited reports under the first amendment, but in that case they should not be protected from civil lawsuits due to damages caused. The