Mistreatment Of Celebrities

Some of us would say “No”, but the majority of us would leap on the prospect of living the life of a celebrity. Who doesn’t want the perks of vacationing all over the world, having someone wait on you hand and foot, receiving freebies from designers and all the other perks that come with being a celebrity? The question is do we want the downfalls that come with fame? Can we handle vicious tabloid scrutiny, fabrications, and assumptions? Being a celebrity has its perks, but at what cost? Fame and money can be the root of all evil. Never the less, we are contributing to the madness when we purchase tabloid magazines, watch entertainment shows that follow celebrity activities and judge them for their actions.

In the health care business, there are certain standards and laws that have been put in place to protect our patients and their personal health information. When a health care facility fails to protect their patient’s confidential information, the US Government may get involved and facilities may be forced to pay huge sums of money in fines, and risk damaging their reputation.

Many people feel uncomfortable or embarrassed when having to display their personal body parts to any individual outside of their significant other. Performing a random drug test on an employee does not only display traces of substance abuse but also other health related factors that they may not want their employer to know of. Examples of this include: maniac depression, schizophrenia, and heart trouble (DeCew, 1994) (Hanson, et al., 2015). Additionally, individuals are very concerned about the disclosure of their personal information being decimated without prior knowledge or consent. In 2007, when George Clooney went into the hospital for a minor procedure, his information was accessed by 27 different people. They were disciplined but the damage was already done. This incident shows that secure computer files are not 100% secure and that the human interest in gossip is everlasting (Goldman, 2009). In some ways, it seems as if the employee is treated as guilty party before proven

Huping Zhou, a former cardiothoracic surgeon from China, whom recently moved to Los Angeles and became employed at UCLA School of Medicine as a researcher, was sentenced to federal prison for HIPAA violations. This made him the first person in the United States to receive a prison sentence for HIPAA violations. His employer informed Zhoe that they were starting the process of terminating his employment .Zhou accessed the medical records of his former colleagues that night. During the following three weeks he accessed the records of celebrities, and high-profile patients 323 times. He claimed that he was unaware that it was illegal to view these records. No evidence was found that Zhou misused the information he obtained, nor did he sell the information. He received a four month jail sentence and a 2,000 dollar fine (Dimick, 2010).

Imagine you are sitting on your sofa watching TV. You are watching a reality show filmed inside an ER, when you see what appears to be your spouse who had recently passed away, dying on the TV. To make matters worse, you nor your spouse gave them permission to film, and then show your spouse’s death. This is the exact scenario that Mrs. Chanko experienced, as she had to watch her husband’s death on TV. Caregivers have a duty to protect their patient’s rights, and they failed to do so for Mr. Chanko, exploiting him, and violating his privacy. While the producers may not have violated his legal rights, his moral rights were clearly violated on several occasions.

The reporter obtained this private information from a temporary employee at the private clinic, which I would consider an untraditional method of gathering information. There are laws set in place that help regulate what kind of information is private, and medical records are included in this list. Therefore, legally, the employee should not have released his girlfriend’s information. While the reporter cannot be responsible for the wrongdoings of his or her source, the reporter should have considered the importance of this information and the necessity of its publication. Information pertaining to a woman’s medical history is not information that is vital for the public to be aware of, despite the fact that she is dating an active opponent of abortions. Even further, by publishing this personal information, the reporter showed a blatant disregard for the effect the publication may have on the woman. While she is dating a public figure, she is a private citizen, and has more rights to control the information released about her. Health records are considered closed, and as such, most citizens do not have a right to access this information. The reporter should have balanced the importance of publishing the information against the harm it may have caused to the girlfriend and adjusted his or her level of intrusiveness accordingly. Furthermore, by following a tip given by one of Jones’s liberal opponents, the reporter was not acting independently, which ultimately calls into questions the motivations and validity of his publication. While one could argue that the public has the right to know that Jones is potentially a hypocrite, the information released is not specifically pertaining to a choice that he made. This reporter actively chose to reveal very personal information about a private citizen who

The hospital should never have let Dr. Phil in to see her since she had already been discharged and was on her way out, hence, no guests were allowed (Moskop et al., 2005). The hospital had the obligation of ensuring that the only visitors who saw the patient were those acceptable by the patient to ensure that visitors such as journalists didn’t have access to the patient that would jeopardize her rights of privacy and confidentiality. Dr. Phil didn’t have the right to make the comments he did. Just because Britney Spears is a celebrity, this didn’t give him any right to infringe her rights to confidentiality and privacy as a patient at Cedar-Sinai Medical Center. The comments made by Dr. Phil sounds a psychological judgment based on his professional expertise and is clearly wrong, unethical, and a violation of state

Star Magazine is a news tabloid that exaggerates and falsifies celebrity gossip. The writers try to find articles that will draw a consumer’s attention towards it by twisting the truth to increase sales, instead of giving valid information. It has been reported that less than ten percent of its cover stories turn out to be true (O’Connor). This includes a story involving Khloe Kardashian’s pregnancy which was proven to be false (Weiss). Star Magazine uses flashy and exciting stories to attract customers claiming their truth, even though, many have been proven wrong. Like the Sophists, Star Magazine tells its readers what they want to hear even if it is not all true. They write stories based on subjective statements instead of objective facts and try to persuade those browsing the buy it. Their intention is to only benefit themselves and not those

There are 316 million people living in the United States and in 2010 every year 133 million find themselves in the emergency room for different reasons (Hospital Utilization, 2015). That is almost half of the population. The population consists of infants, children, teenagers, adults, and the elderly who may be homeless, everyday people, CEO’s, and lets not forget, celebrities. Yes, celebrities get sick and have accidents too. Although it is not advertised like the rest of their life, celebrities are not inhuman and invincible; they sometimes need to seek help just like the rest of us. Being a nurse and a crucial part of the health care field it is likely at some time in our career we will treat or hear of a celebrity who has been admitted to the hospital you work with. How the nurse acts can determine his or her career. Now lets imagine your favorite band is in town and you the nurse have to work because no one can cover your shift. Your friend who is at the concert keeps texting you how much fun it is and you’re becoming flustered because you’re night is beyond ordinary. 2 a.m. rolls around and you hear over the radio about a motor vehicle accident and the medics are bringing the victim in. The medics begin giving you report and you notice it’s the lead singer of the band you were supposed to go see in concert tonight. You text your best friend and she doesn’t believe you so you take numerous pictures of him along with his address, phone number, and health record. After

“Movie stars are supposedly nothing like you and me. They’re svelte, glamorous, self-possessed. They wear dresses we can’t afford and live in houses we can only dream of. Yet it turns out that –in the most painful and personal way-movie stars are more like you and me than we ever knew.”(Zacharek .34). Zacharek explains that movie stars have the luxury of money, but they relate to us because they are sexual harassment by their higher-ups’. Sexual harassment has been known be in Hollywood, but many people don’t understand how serious sexual harassment can get. Many of these actors are afraid of losing their jobs. The #MeToo movement is a movement that was created to help women fight against sexual harassment. Many actors and lawyers want to

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

People constantly try to gain direction and insight from their evaluations of other people. One such way they do so is through stereotypes. Stereotypes are cognitive constructs involving an individual’s half-truths and distorted realities knowledge, expectations, and beliefs about human groups. As such, racial stereotypes are constructed beliefs that all members of the same race share certain specific characteristics. In America, the media and Hollywood play an integral role in entrenching and dispelling these stereotypes. However, Hollywood and the media create characters according to stereotypes to attract an audience, from which the viewers can reflect on and laugh at the stereotypes recognizable within American society. This paper seeks to discuss the common stereotypes in American society and how the media and Hollywood promotes those stereotypes and their impacts.

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.

Working within the media industry, especially as a journalist. It can sometimes be difficult and challenging as you are more than often finding yourself having to raid people’s personal lives to get a story. However, 'Is it in the public interest? ' that is the one question any journalist must ask themselves if they are to publish a story that may contain an individual’s private information.

Paparazzi have been recognized as celebrity fist magnets due to celebrities always attacking the paparazzi when they tend to annoy a celebrity. Most celebrities have reacted to them violently. They also have been called human herpes because nobody wants them, but they’ll always be around. Paparazzi have irritated a lot of celebrities as soon as they step out of their home. Many photographers believe that celebrities have chosen their career and in doing so, lost their right to privacy. Celebrities usually go out of their way to avoid the paparazzi. Namely, Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield who have held up signs while leaving their