Celebrities’ Rights to Privacy

Consequently, by conducting these actions, we are taking away their first amendment right. The value of the first amendment right is really grandiose and perhaps the most crucial right to have. For instance, the first amendment right has shaped the U.S.A to be distinctive from other countries. The first amendment gave everyone, not just common people, the entitlement to freely express themselves. However, with social media watching and judging their every move, it's hard to be a part of everyday life. Even going to the supermarket might have to require a distortion for the media. It's as though celebrities are being trapped in a prison. This is unjust because they never signed a contract agreeing to surrender their lives for the public. It's as if we are making people , who give up their privacy, like robots and force these "robots" to be on top of a cliff overlooking embarrassment and fear. All these people ever asked was to be open to public about his or her talent, not giving up their invaluable privacy. According to (Source A), it states,"It seems somewhat unfair to say that because a person's gift lies in acting, basketball, or singing, rather than, for example, engineering, architecture, or computer science, that he or she has somehow " chosen " to give up all of his or

The question of paparazzi threatening privacy and First Amendment rights is often to situational to argue in a conventional manner, but certainly there are many facets of the issue which can be addressed in a quite straightforward manner. Celebrities who feel they have the right to privacy in public places often muddy the waters of this issue. Oddly enough, those celebrities who have chosen to speak out against what they feel are violations of their privacy most always begin their campaigns with a large press conference. In other words, they gather together those people they wish to not only suppress but also berate in hopes that these people will use their positions and skills to

The boundary between publicity rights and the First Amendment rights is the main legal issue being called into question in this case. There has been a struggle to clearly articulate where the line separating publicity and free speech lies. Arguments can be made on both sides and many famous cases have come about from this issue, most of them going in favor of the first amendment. There is a definite conflict between a celebrity’s right of publicity and the public’s right to free expression represented in the

When analyzing the social make up and the issues associated with celebrities having the power to influences the public, sociological concepts can be applied. Sociology has taught us to be curious and ask the question why. It also takes a scientific approach when answering the types of questions

Sometimes a person doesn't choose to be famous: he or she is just living their life and then - BOOM! - fame follows for whatever reason. Not every actor, singer, dancer, writer craves fame; most simply want to express their creativity. Wanting to entertain or express your art shouldn't come with the excessive price of a goodbye to privacy. Paparazzi shouldn't be able to freely telephoto lens you while you are in your backyard or in the bathroom without some type of consequence. If someone did that to you, you would probably think it’s extremely creepy and get police intervention. Celebrities, on the other hand, are seen as bad, unhappy, or unappreciative jerks if they request their right to privacy. It's a very interesting reversal, and even more so that we continue to pay audience when it seems so wrong in our own “normal”

Multiplicity of people believes that celebrities need to have a sly-out toward facing crimes. However, celebrities’ need to abide enlightened that they are inspirational to little kids, fans, and parents. Why should celebrities’ receive the benefit of the doubt while, people that are not celebrities, be punished and to be charged for every movement and action that they

Have you ever wondered what influences us to behave the way we do? Look a certain way? Or even looked for an explanation to what causes us to apply a certain perspective regarding personal and controversial issues? One of the answers to these questions may revolve around the influence we absorb from celebrities. A definitive term for celebrity is an iconic figure to a category or group who has achieved success in one or multiple aspects of their lives. As a result, these individuals have drawn in publicity and fame. Over the years with the advances in media and other forms of communication, celebrities have become topics of discussion worldwide, rather if it’s at school, with colleagues or at the dinner table, it is fair to say that

Celebrities are everywhere in the news, the latest gossip appears in the weekly magazines without fail. Whether they be an actor, athlete, dancer, designer, model, singer or just rich; there is someone out there who is watching that person like a hawk, not letting a single breath go unnoticed. Such is the life of the rich and famous, under the incessant gaze of journalists and the paparazzi. Lives that many people take a great interest in and admire to the point where others would liken this great interest and admiration to a cult-like worship of celebrities. This is a brief description of what I think to be celebrity culture.

The case study I chose to do is “Tom Cruise, Katie Holmes and Suri Cruise: Do Celebrities Have Privacy?” This case study discusses the very public divorce of actor Tom Cruise and actress Katie Holmes. The two were forced to play out much of their relationship so that the world could see. This bring up a multitude of ethical issues as far as a person’s right to privacy and dealing with their personal lives.

Celebrities have a right to have their own privacy, and the paparazzi had better not be allowed to restrict their lives. Furthermore, photographers and journalists must not be permitted to make news that can influence celebrities' success adversely. The rights of celebrities for privacy have always been abused, so they need to defend their rights, despite their profession. Though they are public figures, this does not mean that the publish of every detail of their private lives is justifiable. It is legitimate to take pictures when they are at the stage or on the red carpet, yet most cases they must be left alone. However, the media always inclines to release both sensational and negative news to public. The latest pattern is the Chris Brown and Rihanna domestic abuse scandal ("Chris Brown and Rihanna: A Dangerous Relationship" 1). This really influenced Chris

Once upon a time, I woke up in the morning and decided to turn on the television and switch the channel to the news. I instantly regretted the decision. Recently, the validity of news sources has grown noticeably questionable. With lies and mistruths swarming around such an industry, it is only natural to question various aspects of the industry as a whole. Upon further analysis, celebrity stories strike me as an aspect that needs to be disposed of. News sources should not publish celebrity stories since the numerous costs of the stories are much greater than is permissible.

Currently, there is a noticeable interest of the media for the lives of celebrities, who include politicians, sports people and TV and music stars. Although it is acceptable a larger exposure of their lives in newspapers, magazines and TV shows than of an ordinary citizen, I believe that there are some arguments that support the idea that these public personalities also deserve a minimum level of privacy.

The media often uses censorship as a form of persuasion. Media is obsessed with how the public reads into certain things. Sean Redmond observes this concept through the mention of how celebrity and media interacts with the public: “the aim of public relations is ‘the deliberate, planned and sustained effort to establish and maintain mutual understanding between an organization and its publics’”

Whether we admit or not, many have a fascination with those in the public eye. We want to know about their secret to success, the skeletons in their closet and if they really are human like the rest of us.

Additionally, breaking and entering or using trickery, impersonation, fraud and disguise to gain admission to a private area are illegal. Even though these acts are illegal, some members of the media still break the law to get the picture or story they want. Often times,