Socratics

Socratic Law Issue 6

Mass Communication Law

10/10/06

Clearly, there is a difference between celebrities, that is public people, and private individuals who are not constantly in the public eye. However, celebrities should not have to put up with more privacy invasion simply because they are public individuals. Celebrities also have the right to their privacy, and they shouldn’t lose this right just because of their public status. They deserve to have the same protection against privacy intrusion.

A celebrity is a person who is widely recognized (famous) in a society, and commands a high degree of public and media attention. In order to achieve celebrity status, a person must attract a high level of public interest. It is this public interest that compels people to intrude on their privacy.

Celebrities should have the same protection against invasion of privacy because they are people too, with secrets and private affairs that are none of our business. They shouldn’t lose this right because of their public status. They have a right to protect their physical space and private affairs, just like we private people do.

Sometimes, journalists may exceed acceptable means of obtaining information. For example, paparazzo Ron Galella hounded President John F. Kennedy’s widow, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, in attempting to photograph her and her children. He bribed and lied trying to find where Onassis would be. Galella’s pursuit of Onassis was a preview of the press’s craziness that memorialized the dying moments of Britain’s Princess Diana, and maybe led to the accident that killed her.

In short, celebrities should have the same protections that private people have regarding invasion of privacy. They should not put with more intrusion merely because of the interest that the public has on them. They are entitled to protecting their dignity by preventing unwanted violations on their private property and personal affairs.