Are ALL 'celebrities' entitled to the same degree of privacy in the media as ordinary citizens?
There are currently 10 posts for this topic.
| From Martin Townsend, Editor, Sunday Express No |
|
| Martin Townsend | 20 02 2004 09:16:19 |
| From Keith Robinson, NUJ If celebrities choose a career where they become rich and or famous, they should accept that they will attract media attention. The solution is for them to dilute their egos. They seem to want the publicity on the way up, only to do a greta garbo once they reach the top. It's a tough life being a multi-millionaire! |
|
| Keith Robinson | 20 02 2004 10:09:00 |
| From Hampden Smith, Washington and Lee University, USA I'm not sure it's quite so straightforward. Should a celebrity or a public official be able to determine, or the press define, areas of personal life that are not public? A musician's music is of course open to comment, but is his or her lifestyle if the musician doesn't make it a matter of public knowledge? What of a politician's indiscretion 30 years ago? It seems to me that even a public figure or official should be able to expect some small circle of privacy, so long as it's not a matter of genuine public interest. |
|
| Hampden Smith | 09 03 2004 19:00:16 |
| From Kimberley Of course if they choose to become a celebrity then they have to deal with a certain amount of press publicity, however, everyone, including celebrities, are entitled to their privacy and should be given more. |
|
| Kimberley | 23 03 2004 09:47:47 |
| From Cate Clarke I am doing a debate on the topic that celebrities forfeit their right to privacy. I do agree with this because they do! |
|
| Cate Clarke | 24 05 2005 07:01:47 |
| From Nikki Page I think that celebrities chose their own career paths and most of them are only famous either for something ridiculous or because they desperately wanted to be famous and then they complain when they are famous that there privacy is limited! |
|
| Nikki Page | 11 10 2005 18:39:12 |
| From Amy Williamson, University of Dundee I am doing my dissertation on a legal development of the protection of privacy intrusion in the UK. I am looking at a lot of cases concerning celebrities. It appears to me that the Human Right Act 1998 applies to every single person in the UK, therefore art 8(1)and (2) applies to criminals, victims of devastation, politicians, celebrities. EVERYONE HAS A RIGHT TO PRIVACY and should be free from media intrusion. |
|
| amy williamson | 23 10 2005 21:52:01 |
| From Alberto Jones First of all, article 8 of the HRA 1998 is not an absolute right and is subject for derrogation when it is in the public interest. Also, it only offers the right to respect to private and family life and NOT public life. Therefore if a celebrity puts themselves in the public domain, they have got to accept the negative press that comes with the territory of being famous. Celebrity is fueled by media interest, and whether that interest is positive or negative, celebrities must accept this as a necessary evil. |
|
| alberto jones | 15 11 2005 15:16:33 |
| From Nel Once they get out there, they become public property. Maybe a little more than they ask for! |
|
| Nel | 28 03 2006 09:37:54 |
| Form Kirsty They wanted to be famous so they should just deal with it. But their partners and children should not be photographed. |
|
| Kirsty | 20 06 2006 11:29:42 |
Back to Forum Topics.