A a list is provided (on page 191) of the justifications that journalists use for the invasion of people's privacy. These include:
- By entering public life, individuals surrender any claim to personal privacy: accordingly, they are 'fair game' for enquiring journalists;
- Journalists have a duty to report private situations when these details could have relevance to the public performance of an individual or group;
- Individual journalists are simply conduits for information, and it is up to the readers/listeners/viewers to decide the limits;
- If it is not illegal, it must be permissible.
However, I noticed a very relevant point in the conclusion of the same chapter. It notes: "It is difficult to see how many of the media's intrusions into individual privacy are to the benefit of us at all."
Personally, the only cases that I believe require the invasion of personal privacy is in relations to matters of public safety, politics, and as part of the 'watchdog' function. Matters that are based upon gossip or scandal are not acceptable.
sources:
Tapsall, S & Varley, C., 2001, "Journalism: Theory and Practice" Journalism Theory and Practice, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
recommended reading:
http://www.theherald.com.au/blogs/national-comment/journalists-jealousy-behind-a-blogger-unmasked/1960165.aspx
This Herald article is all about the issue of when it's okay to invade a politician's private life. It was published earlier this year following the revelation of David Campbell's visit to a gay nightclub, a personal choice that has little relevance to his professional life.
I agree with your stance that matters of public safety, politics and the role of the media watchdog are important aspects of journalism that can require an invasion of privacy to get to the truth. But like I say in my own blog
ReplyDeletehttp://jennahancockjournalism.blogspot.com/ there is an idyllic perception of journalism that is not reality. Gossip and scandal are commonly associated with lower culture, but as a result attract more audience and more money! Gossip and scandal are not acceptable but they remain the attraction behind entertainment 'news'!
I found your post very interesting. I definitely agree that so much of the news we see daily cannot be attributed to 'the public interest' because really it is not in our interest or to our benefit at all, except for gossip of course. I think your regulations are a good start for journalists in learning the true meaning of 'in the public interest'.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to add a relevant and interesting quote I just found:
ReplyDelete"News is what someone, somewhere, wants concealed. Everything else is advertising."
(Jervis 1987, p. 62)
The quote can be found on pg 23 of Journalism Theory and Practice.