Essay Laws against the Paparazzi Frenzy

The Age of Technology we currently inhabit is one that I truly believe will be reflected upon as the greatest [age] of all time by the time it is over. I say this because of the sheer amount of technological developments we have at our disposal, the revolutionary breakthroughs we have made, and in sheer awe of the of the amount of potential possibilities that we have at our disposal to unlock and grant the future. Although, we are amidst a great age of time, there are still flaws apparent throughout that still continue to linger unwanted by many- myself included. One such flaw that has continued to plague us with its existence is law enforcement’s along with the U.S government’s abrupt favoritism of invading our privacy by utilizing

said, " Stepping out of my front door gives me anxiety." No privacy has also turned celebs like Shia LaBeouf, and Justin Bieber to go crazy. Privacy also causes celebrities not to have good relationships with friends.

Gatekeepers such as publishers and the government play a role in photo manipulation. As Newton (Newton J, 2001, pg. 74) suggests that "those who tend the gates of reportage tend power". These people are the ones who decide what the public ‘needs to know', what is ‘appropriate', what is ‘news' and also what the public needs to ‘see'. Gatekeepers as such must answer questions like: "Will publishing a picture of the body of a drowning victim prevent others from drowning at the same spot, or will it only exploit a tragic situation to sell newspapers?" (Newton J, 2001)

Today, we can find tabloids and magazines on shelves of supermarkets or kiosks with pictures of celebrities or occasionally normal people who do not realize that they were photographed while they were in their home or enjoying their vacations. The motivation for those photographers who take those photos are probably the same which motivated Darwin Bonaparte to film John in the novel “Brave New World”. They aspire to be famous and wealthy. They are truly selfish, irresponsible and materialistic. Indeed, they gravely violate the right of those people to have privacy. For example, an article published in the USA Today mentions and presents different opinions about it,

King, Geoffrey. "Clear and present danger: the NSA, surveillance and the threat to press freedom." Nieman Reports 68.1 (2014): 38+. Academic OneFile. Web. 8 Apr. 2014.

A career in front of the camera is the dream job for numerous Americas. Little do they know they may have already been on camera. Every day people in the United States of America are caught in the lens of law enforcement cameras. These cameras sound nefarious due to their constant watching of people. However, law enforcement cameras are anything but nefarious as their intent is to stop actions that may rightly be deemed nefarious. The cameras the law enforcement use may be on the street, a member of the law enforcement, a police car or a traffic light. With all the cameras, their purpose is for the good of the people and to enforce laws. However, there is controversy surrounding the usage of the law enforcement cameras due to how some people

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

This bill was proposed in order to regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes. This bill was proposed on December 16th, 2015. The current status of this bill is that it is still being introduced to the House. Well, with this information stated I am in favor of this bill. I am in favor of this bill because of the very valuable possibilities it presents such as the safety and well being of others. The bill also ensures the constitutional right to bear arms, and the ability to regulate the very dangerous assault weapon world.

once said that if you did not like what the paparazzi had to say, then you

Stalking is a crime that many Americans have dealt with both privately and publicly. In fact, according to the U.S. Bureau of Justice, “3.4 million persons in the U.S. are affected by the crime of stalking annually” (Baum & Catalano, 2009). Despite this, the crime is often marginalized. This issue of marginalization comes from the difficulty of actually lawfully describing stalking. For example, even though the federal government and all the states have laws that do address stalking the definition of stalking is different in each state. These laws vary on the type of fear the victim has, their distress, as well as the behavior or intent of their stalker. The U.S Bureau of Justice elaborates on this phenomena and observes that, “Some state laws specify that the

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

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

The downside of fame is the interference of the media in one’s life. Stories concerning celebrities are likely to attract customers, just for entertainment purposes. Celebrities’ life is publicized, criticized and mocked at. Reporting celebrities downfall seems to be particularly appealing to the public, and it seems that hardly a day passes without the news reporting a celebrity’s’ downfall. Some people are obsessed with famous people, their life styles, and have desire for more information. Media’s negative role destroys the famous people’s lives. Famous people deserve privacy and respect. This essay will discuss the unfair treatment received by famous people from the media.

People reasonably expect privacy inside a house or fenced yard not visible from the street and inside living facilities such as in hospitals and nursing homes. Photographers need permission to both enter and photograph these private places. However, anyone is fair game to be photographed and have their picture published if the photo was taken from a public place. This includes people seen through the windows of their own home (Dill, 178). However, one New York Court ruled that photographers shooting inside a restaurant needed permission because the restaurant was a public place for purposes of dining, and patrons dining there should reasonably be allowed to dine in peace (Dill, 177). Even though it is currently legal to photograph public figures in the privacy of their own homes, ethically speaking it does not mean these pictures should be published. However, because ethical codes are not working, there needs to be legal reform.