Journalism EthicsPublic’s Right to Know versus Infringement of Privacy

By Andrea Laksmiwardani
Should people in the public eye expect their privacy to be respected by the media?
Public figures should expect their privacy to be respected by the media because
individual’sprivilege to privacy is a fundamental human right. The definition of privacy is
hard to distinguishas it incorporates a wide range of issues which are not easily defined
by a single formula. Tomany people, privacy is the expectation that confidential and
personal information will not bedisclosed to third parties due to the potential
embarrassment and emotional distress it can cause the person involved (Smith
2008).There are times when journalists are torn in between what they think is the public’s right to
knowand individual’s right of privacy (Rolnicki, Tate, & Taylors 2007). In the following
essay, I willaddress the importance and determinant factors that differentiate individual’s
right to privacy of those people who live in the public eye and the right of public to know
the truth. Various caseswill be included to help exemplify the effects of invasion of
privacy caused by the media anddistinguish the tolerable level of public’s rights to know.
Individual’s right to privacy
People in the public eye should anticipate the community to be interested in
their lives asgaining a public role indirectly means giving up a portion of their private space. This,
however,
iso n l y   e t h i c a l   a t   a   c e r t a i n   e x t e n t   b e c a u s e   t h e r e   i s   i n d i v i d u a l ’ s   r i g h t   o f  
p r i v a c y   t o   c o n s i d e r , regardless on the subject’s role or position in the
public’s eye. As stated in Article 12 of
theU n i v e r s a l   D e c l a r a t i o n   o f   H u m a n   R i g h t s   o f   1 9 4 8 :   “ N o   o n e   s h a l l   b e  
s u b j e c t e d   t o   a r b i t r a r y interference with his privacy, family, home or
correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right
to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks(Keeble 2009, p. 134 and
Article 12).”With the media being one of the
public’s source of entertainment, privacy of individuals,especially those who
expose themselves in the public’s eye, are often harassed. Media tendsto write
stories from their own biases, heartlessly intruding the private
lives of politicians,celebrities, royal families, or merely, just a regular citizen
who happens to stumble in to thepublic forum (Smith 2008, p. 240-242). When
it comes to politicians, news shall not be reportedif the news does not affect the way politician
handles his or her duties. Take the case of FranklinRoosevelt as an example. He was suffering
polio disease during his presidency in the 1930sand 1940s, yet the press respected his
privacy because he’s disease did not affect the way hehandled his duty as a president
(Smith 2008, p.242). It was reported that the news media hadavoided doing any form of
coverage regarding the president’s illness and there were only twopictures of him in his
wheelchair that were published.
 
 Another form on invasion of privacy will be towards a group of people who happen to
unwillinglystumble into the public forum, such as murderers or victims of crime. Their rights to privacy
havebeen taken away when publication of private facts about them is exposed; facts
that are mostprobably offensive and lead to no legitimate concern of the public
(Rolnicki, Tate, & Taylors2007, p.382). Best exemplifies this point is the case of
Osama Bin Laden’s wife. An interviewwith the wife of Bin Laden done by
The Guardian
newspaper violates her right of individual of privacy, asking personal things such as Bin
Laden’s favorite food and his routine at home (Nasr,2002).
The right of public to know
Practicing journalism which prioritizes individual’s right to privacy is widely
recommended in journalism, but there are times which the public’s right to
know should be the journalist’s mainconcern. In my opinion, publics have the right
to be aware of the things that concerns their  safety or things that might affect
their way of living. To best exemplify this point is the articlewritten by Elliot Jaspen and
Maria Miro Johnson which reported the criminal histories of RhodeIsland’s school bus
drivers (Meyer 2002, p. 232). When the ex-convicts are working as schoolbus drivers
and are consistently interacting with children of the neighborhood, publics have theright
to know because it is concerning the safety of their children. Another example will be taken from
the political perspective of public’s right to know. During
thepresidential election of 1992, Bill Clinton was facing media allegations reg
arding “sexualexploits” when he was the governor of Arkansas (BBC News,
1998). In order to have a fair dealing election, public have the right to know about
the morality of the person that will becomethe future president of their country. Whether
or not this information effect the outcome of theelection is for the public to decide. A
politician’s secret love story being exposed in the media isnot a form of privacy invasion
because “scandalous behaviors of this nature cannot legitimatelyclaim the protection of
privacy” (Belsey & Chadwick 2006, p.58). This stir in the media causedthe public to
doubt his honesty and morality, but Clinton proved to have many
supportersregardless of this incident, which eventually lead to his presidency (Smith, 2008).
Conclusion
Nevertheless, every person should expect their rights to be respected by the media, even thosewho
are in the public’s eye because privacy is an element of human rights.
According toMatthew Kieran, a Professor of Philosophy and Arts, privacy concerns
area of our lives whichwe practice self-directed control and it is not the right of others to
be involve unless we chose todo so (Keeble 2009, p. 134).Journalists should always
consider the right of individual’s privacy, even if it is contradicting
witht h e   p u b l i c ’ s   r i g h t   t o   k n o w .   T h i n g s   t h a t   s h o u l d   b e   c o n s i d e r e d   i n c l u
d e s   t h e   s o c i a l   v a l u e   o f   information as well as how deeply the facts intrude the person’s
private activity and its relevance(Rolnicki, Tate, & Taylors 2007, p. 382).
 
References:
B B C   N e w s   1 9 9 8 ,
 All the president’s women
.   1   J u n e   1 9 9 8 ,   o n l i n e ,   f r o m
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/special_report/1998/clinton_scandal/49771.stm, accessedin
3 June 2011.Belsey, A & Chadwick R F 2006,
Ethical issues in journalism and the media
, Taylor &Francis, New York.
Keeble, R 2009,
Ethics for journalists: second edition
, Routledge, Oxon.Nasr, K 2002,
He rarely eats meat but likes to go hunting,
The Guardian Newspaper, online,from 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2002/mar/15/features11.g21, accessedin 3
June 2011.
Smith, F.R. 2008,
Ethics in journalism: sixth edition,
Blackwell, Massachusetts.Meyer, P 2002,
Precision Journalism: Reporter’s introduction to social sciences methods
, 4
th
edition, Rowman & Littlefields,
Maryland.R o l n i c k i ,   T . E ,   T a t e ,   C . D . ,   &   T a y l o r ,   S . A .   2 0 0 7 ,
Scholastic journalism, 11
th
ed.,
Blackwell,Victoria.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
1948, Article 12, online, from
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml, accessed on 2 June 2011.