My argument is that privacy is more important than the freedom of press... I need to come up with things that support this.... it could be on the lines of why privacy is important... I need 3 things or somthing that the privacy would be invaded if the press did - - and - three things. If u have any other approach please tell me. here is what I have so far :
The right to produce news without any government interference cannot override a person’s right to privacy. The press is there to spread information to people which helps them analyze society and government; information that helps people to grow intellectually. The press is not there to expose the private lives of individuals in the name of news worthiness.
Pleaseeeeeeee I need some suggestions!!!! My brain has turned into cheeze! Please help me!
2007-11-06 18:07:25 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Its too late to turn it around n say that freedom of press is more important. I have no time so I have to stick with what i have got.
2007-11-06 18:27:57 · update #1
News should be about events not just people. I agree the press should not have the right to interfere in people's lives, however, is someone does something newsworthy, all bets are off. They become famous or infamous and open to public scrutiny.
2007-11-06 18:12:53 · answer #1 · answered by Q M 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you can also approach the asepct of the media creating mass hysteria when it comes to reporting the issues on a local nature. when it constricts the investigatin of a police matter in regards to catching a criminial or the fact that it sometimes crossed the line into slander and liable it needs to be restricted to only reporting the facts of the issues and not the individual reporters opinion or ideas. when this happens nonone wins because it invades the core issues of the news and thereby contaminates what needs to be known by the public for its own safety and security. When the government perpetrates a heinous act against the people it also needs to be known so that the people it affects the most can take action to prevent or enhance the action of the government. however when it starts delving into the personal lives of individual that press needs to be held accountable for the damage it may or can cause by the smearing or detrimental effects of the reporting. It also needs to concentrate on issues that defraud the people of taxes such as the issues of a local government selling public land for a certain amount and then being forced to purchase that land back at a substantially higher price because the owners of that land know that they can defraud the city/county of more money than what they originally purchased the land for which was developement within a crash zone of a major military installation which the city/county knew before hand. now the city/county is forced to repurchase the land back or otherwise loose the government contract to keep that base within it's city/county limits which would cost the city/county billions of in revenue in government subsidies. now that is something worth discussing in your disertation and hopefully open new avenues for you to exlore.
2007-11-07 04:08:07 · answer #2 · answered by David A 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your whole argument is cheez. Think about it. Bill Clinton is caught with Monica. The press wants to know about their relationship and he just says it's personal and they all have to leave him alone. Are you talking about whether Britney is wearing underwear or leaving her kids in the car? That is not news, it's gossip, which is what passes for a lot of TV news. The freedom of the press outweighs a number of important rights, including privacy. About the only exception is a rape victim's identity which is usually not disclosed by the press. They did betray the confidence of Kobe Bryant's accuser, but the interests of the Lakers in LA outweighed her rights apparently.
2007-11-07 02:23:53 · answer #3 · answered by mattapan26 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
ummm I got one:
people need and like having a certain amount privacy, just like people that are not famous, because they would always have to think twice when doing something that could cause a lot of controversy when it would cause absolutely nothing to a person that isnt famous
2007-11-07 02:18:55 · answer #4 · answered by britt 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋