Media Law Handbook by IIP Digital of the US Embassy. - HTML preview

PLEASE NOTE: This is an HTML preview only and some elements such as links or page numbers may be incorrect.
Download the book in PDF, ePub for a complete version.

indolent, column upon column is

of the European Convention similarly

filled with idle gossip, which can only

guarantees “the right to respect for his

be procured by intrusion upon the

private and family life, his home and his

domestic circle. …When personal

correspondence.”

Above: After Hustler owner Larry Flynt, left, published a lewd parody of Virginia televangelist Rev. Jerry Falwel , right, Falwel sued Flynt for libel.

The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court where Chief Justice Wil iam Rehnquist wrote that Falwel , as a public figure, must tolerate such attacks in order to give sufficient “breathing space” to the freedoms protected by the First Amendment.

[ 31 ]

[ a F r a m e w o r k f o r a F r e e P r e s s ]

On the national level, privacy rights

in libel, but on his own sense of violation

may be guaranteed by the constitution, by

of self. Many countries recognize some

statute, or by common law. Article 5 of the

or all of them.

Constitution of Brazil, for example, de-

Intrusion on seclusion most common-

clares, “The private life of an individual is

ly arises in the context of news gather-

natural and inviolable.” The Danish Crim-

ing. It includes not only physical trespass

inal Code guarantees the right to privacy

into another’s private space but also

by making it an offense to trespass into

eavesdropping, tape recording, or other-

private homes, to access private papers, to

wise intercepting private conversations

use mechanical devices to eavesdrop, to

without permission. Although the Su-

photograph or spy on individuals when on

preme Court once observed, “Without

private property, to communicate someone

some protection for seeking out the news,

else’s private facts to another person, or to

freedom of the press would be eviscerat-

intrude on another’s solitude after having

ed,” the high court has never exempted

been warned to leave him alone. Germany

journalists from generally applicable

guarantees “the right of personality” in its

laws that prohibit intrusion. The use of

Basic Law. And the right of privacy is guar-

hidden cameras, for example, is unlaw-

anteed in South Africa both in Section 14

ful in some states, and the Supreme

of the constitution and by common law.

Court let stand a Florida ruling that

Courts in the United States, however,

statutes prohibiting the use of concealed

were slow to recognize a right to privacy.

tape recorders do not violate the First

Although the Supreme Court has inter-

Amendment rights of the press.

preted the Fourth Amendment of the U.S.

In most, but not all, jurisdictions,

Constitution to protect individuals from

journalists are free to record or photo-

unreasonable searches and seizures, as

graph anything they can observe in a

well as other unwarranted intrusions by

public place. However, there are excep-

government agents, the amendment ap-

tions. Scottish author J. K. Rowling, of

plies to the government and not to actions

Harry Potter fame, successfully sued for

by other individuals. With the exception

invasion of privacy on behalf of her

of a handful of federal statutes that pro-

young son after she was photographed

hibit certain types of electronic intercep-

on an Edinburgh street while pushing

tion of private communications, U.S.

him in a stroller. A young Canadian

privacy law is almost exclusively the prov-

woman recovered damages from a Mon-

ince of the 50 states.

treal magazine that had photographed

By 1960, the American legal scholar

her sitting on a door stoop after, she

William Prosser had identified four dis-

claimed, her friends made fun of her.

tinct privacy torts:

Even though she was in public at the

� intrusion on seclusion;

time the picture was taken, the Supreme

� publication of private facts;

Court of Canada found that her right to

� depiction of another in a false light;

control the use of her image in the media

was guaranteed by the privacy clause in

� misappropriation or commercial use

of another’s name or image.

the Quebec human rights charter.

The publication of private facts tort

Some arise from common law. Others

presents a free-expression dilemma be-

are statutory. Not every jurisdiction rec-

cause it permits legal action to be brought

ognizes all four torts. But each is designed

against journalists who have published

to provide a remedy to an individual

the truth. Nevertheless, many countries

based not on his external reputation, as

recognize some version of this tort. The

[ 32 ]

[ M e d i a L a w | H a n d b o o k ]

United States construes it narrowly,

example, and reporting details of

limiting actions to publication of inti-

the private life of an individual who,

mate facts highly offensive to a reason-

moreover, as in this case, does not

able person and of no legitimate public

exercise official functions. While in

concern. A public figure or public official

the former case the press exercises

will probably be held to have a dimin-

its vital role of “watchdog” in a

ished expectation of privacy.

democracy by contributing to

The challenge for any journalist is to

impart[ing] information and ideas

determine whether a court would deem

on matters of public interest,…it

a particular fact newsworthy. A news or-

does not do so in the latter case.

ganization’s decision to publish informa-

tion does not necessarily mean that it is

Broadly speaking, however, informa-

of public concern. One also must distin-

tion that is in the public domain—for ex-

guish between issues that are of legiti-

ample, details that can be obtained from

mate public interest and connecting

public records or proceedings—cannot

those issues with individuals. For exam-

be the basis of an invasion of privacy suit

ple, when the British tabloid newspaper

for publication of private facts. In 1989,

The Daily Mirror published photographs

the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the

of Naomi Campbell leaving a Narcotics

victim of a sexual assault could not sue a

Anonymous meeting, the supermodel

newspaper that included her name as

was able to recover damages for invasion

part of a criminal incident roundup. Even

of privacy. The House of Lords concluded

though Florida, the state in which she re-

that although the general topic of sub-

sided, prohibited news organizations

stance abuse was a matter of public con-

from publishing the names of rape vic-

cern, Campbell’s addiction and treatment

tims, the high court found that because

were not.

the newspaper had obtained the infor-

A more extreme example involved

mation legally—from a police report form

Princess Caroline von Hannover of Mo-

that had been inadvertently made avail-

naco, who claimed that publication of

able in the sheriff’s department press

photographs depicting her going about

room—it could not be held liable for ac-

ordinary activities, including horseback

curately reporting the information. Sim-

riding, shopping, and skiing, violated

ilarly, individuals who consent to the

her privacy under German law. The Ger-

release of information, or who affirma-

man courts rejected her claims, but in

tively disclose it themselves, generally

2004, the European Court of Human

cannot complain if it is published.

Rights upheld them, finding that her

The tort of false-light invasion of pri-

rights as guaranteed by Article 8 of the

vacy is something of a legal anomaly and

European Convention on Human Rights

is not universally embraced. A few coun-

had been violated. The court acknowl-

tries, such as Hungary and South Africa,

edged that Von Hannover is a public fig-

allow actions for publication of false and

ure but ruled the photographs involved

misleading information, but only about

no matter of general concern:

two-thirds of American states recognize

A fundamental distinction must be

the tort. Similar to libel, false light al-

made between reporting facts—

lows individuals to sue for depictions that

even controversial ones—capable of

imply inaccurate, but not necessarily de-

contributing to a debate in a demo-

famatory, facts. These may arise in the

cratic society relating to politicians

context of embellishment or fictionaliza-

in the exercise of their functions, for

tion, such as in a docudrama or other

[ 33 ]

[ a F r a m e w o r k f o r a F r e e P r e s s ]

dramatization of a true story. But many

Limits on Government

false-light cases arise from the publica-

Licensing of Journalists and News

tion of photographs or videotape coupled

Organizations

with misleading captions, headlines, or

stories. For example, in 2002, an actor

Mandatory licensing of reporters has

been justified as a means of ensur-

whose photograph appeared on the cover

ing that only qualified individuals en-

of Playgirl successfully sued the maga-

gage in journalism and of keeping

zine in federal court in California by ar-

professional standards high. Some inter-

guing that the combination of the picture

national organizations have advocated

and the headlines created the false im-

licensing to protect journalists from gov-

pression that nude photographs of him

ernment harassment or harm. But when

appeared inside.

a government asserts authority to deter-

Appropriation of an individual’s name

mine who can and cannot cover the news,

or image for commercial purposes is re-

it claims, says Leonard Sussman of Free-

garded in many jurisdictions as essen-

dom House, “a license to censor.” The

tially a proprietary right, comparable to

lack of a license can provide the pretext

trademark or copyright. Others consider

for arresting journalists or expelling

it an extension of the right of personali-

them from a country, and regimes can

ty. As an Irish Law Reform Commission

arbitrarily withhold licenses from report-

report put it:

ers whose work they wish to suppress. As

Where the person does not consent

the 1980 International Commission for

to such use of the photograph, she

the Study of Communication Problems,

or he may feel offended and embar-

also known as the MacBride Commission

rassed simply because they dislike

report to UNESCO, concluded, “Licens-

publicity or because they dislike

ing schemes might well lead to restric-

being associated with the product.

tive regulations governing the conduct of

In such cases, the protected inter-

journalists; in effect, protection would be

est is not necessarily proprietary or

granted only to those journalists who

commercial. It is human dignity.

had earned official approval.” In 1985,

the Inter-American Court of Human

China, Australia, Austria, Canada,

Rights ruled a Costa Rican journalist-

Germany, and France are among the

licensing statute contrary to the Ameri-

countries recognizing some variation of

can Convention on Human Rights and,

this tort. In Italy, Article 41(2) of the con-

by extension, all human rights conven-

stitution permits individuals to commer-

tions, “insofar as it denied some persons

cially exploit the image of another person,

access to the full use of the news media

as long as consent is first obtained. In the

as a means of expressing themselves or

United States, the tort is limited to unau-

imparting information.”

thorized uses in advertisements or prod-

Mandatory membership, certification,

uct endorsement. For example, the Texas

or educational requirements can prevent

appropriation statute, (known as the

individuals from gathering and dissemi-

Buddy Holly Act because it was enacted

nating information and deprive others of

in response to exploitation of the deceased

the opportunity to receive it. Principle 8

singer’s name and image,) specifically ex-

of the Declaration of Chapultepec draws

empts any use in a play, book, film, radio

the logical conclusion: “The membership

program, magazine or newspaper article,

of journalists in guilds, their affiliation

political material, or work of art. Paro-

to professional and trade associations

dies or satirical works are also protected.

and the affiliation of the media with

[ 34 ]

[ M e d i a L a w | H a n d b o o k ]

business groups must be strictly volun-

able First Amendment right to

tary.” Mandatory licensing or affiliation

broadcast comparable to the right

requirements for journalists remain in

of every individual to speak, write

place in many countries in Africa, Asia,

or publish. …It would be strange if

and the Middle East. Although in June

the First Amendment, aimed at pro-

2009, the Supreme Court in Brazil abol-

tecting and furthering communica-

ished a legal regulation requiring a uni-

tions, prevented the Government

versity degree and membership in a

from making radio communication

union, nine Latin American countries

possible by requiring licenses to

continue to impose some requirements.

broadcast and by limiting the

And in Zimbabwe, journalists challenged

number of licenses so as not to

the establishment of a media accredita-

overcrowd the spectrum.

tion authority empowered to assess li-

censing fees, which the journalists

U.S. law authorizes FCC control over

claimed were grossly unreasonable and

some aspects of broadcast station owner-

restrictive of freedom of expression.

ship. It may prohibit the concentration of

Licensing conditions news organiza-

many outlets in the hands of a single en-

tion operations upon government approv-

tity or limit cross-ownership, where one

al. It affords another means of controlling

company controls multiple media plat-

the press and promoting self-censorship.

forms in a single market. Nevertheless,

Article 10 of the European Convention on

the FCC’s jurisdiction over broadcasters’

Human Rights guarantees freedom from

content decisions is subject to the First

“interference by public authority” but

Amendment, and in recent years has

has never been interpreted to prohibit li-

been limited primarily to regulating in-

censing requirements. Nevertheless, li-

decency and to requiring broadcasters to

censing requirements can, under some

provide equal opportunities for opposing

circumstances, also be viewed as censor-

candidates for public office to appear on

ship and, accordingly, as incompatible

the airwaves during the period immedi-

with freedom of expression.

ately preceding an election.

The fairness doctrine, which required

Additional Government

broadcast licensees to report on contro-

Regulation

I

versial issues of public importance in

n many jurisdictions, the government’s

their communities and to provide re-

power to regulate content differs be-

sponsible representatives of opposing

tween print and broadcast media. In the

views a reasonable opportunity to reply,

United States, the First Amendment is

was repealed by the FCC in 1987. At that

held to prohibit any government licens-

time, the commission concluded that be-

ing of newspapers and magazines, but

cause of the explosion of new media out-

the Federal Communications Commis-

lets, the doctrine was no longer necessary

sion (FCC) has exclusive authority to

to serve the public interest in receiving

license use of the electromagnetic spec-

“diverse and antagonistic sources of in-

trum, which is regarded as a scarce pub-

formation.” The commission added that:

lic resource. As the Supreme Court

The intrusion by government into

observed in 1969:

the content of programming occa-

Where there are substantially more

sioned by the enforcement of doc-

individuals who want to broadcast

trine unnecessarily restricts the

than there are frequencies to allo-

journalistic freedom of broadcasters

cate, it is idle to posit an unabridge-

…and actually inhibits the presen-

[ 35 ]

[ a F r a m e w o r k f o r a F r e e P r e s s ]

tation of controversial issues of

read, see or hear the matter contained or

public importance to the detri-

embodied in it.” The late U.S. Supreme

ment of the public and in degrada-

Court Justice Potter Stewart, when asked

tion of the editorial prerogatives of

to define obscenity, famously observed, “I

broadcast journalists.

know it when I see it.”

In most countries, publishing or dis-

Taxation, too, presents issues. Tax

tributing obscene materials is a criminal

laws that apply to all for-profit corpora-

offense. Prior restraints on their distribu-

tions are generally acceptable, while

tion are often considered constitutional.

those singling out the news media for

Many laws seek to protect children from

special obligations often are deemed un-

both exploitation and exposure to porno-

constitutional prior restraints on speech.

graphic materials. However, national and

By the same token, restrictions on the in-

international freedom of expression guar-

ternational circulation of news media

antees generally protect the access rights

products violate both Article 10 of the

European Convention on Human Rights

of consenting adults, except for certain

and Article 19 of the International Cov-

specific categories. In Germany, the crimi-

enant on Civil and Political Rights, which

nal code prohibits distribution of pornog-

guarantee the free flow of information

raphy that depicts abuse of children. In

and ideas “regardless of frontiers.”

Sweden, some images of sexual violence

An extensive discussion of licensing

can be banned. Child pornography, wheth-

and regulatory schemes is beyond the

er or not legally obscene, enjoys no consti-

scope of this book. In general, it is legiti-

tutional protection in the United States.

mate to require news organizations to

Many countries forbid the sales of any por-

abide by corporate laws and regulations

nography to those under age 18.

of general applicability (such as register-

In mature democracies, obscenity laws

ing the names and addresses of those le-

usually raise no significant concerns for

gally responsible for the organization’s

mainstream news organizations. But in

operations). Any government regulation

some countries, outdated statutes still rec-

of media operations or content decisions

ognize offenses like “conspiracy to corrupt

should be transparent; subject to public

public morals” or “outraging public decen-

scrutiny, participation, and oversight;

cy.” Vaguely worded laws may proscribe

and no more extensive than necessary to

indecent or obscene material without de-

promote identified public interests.

fining it, or they may lack qualifying lan-

guage like that adopted by the U.S.

Only Narrow and Carefully

Supreme Court in 1973, which limited ob-

Tailored Restrictions on

scenity to those works that, “taken as a

Indecent or Obscene Speech

P

whole, lack serious literary, artistic, politi-

robably the biggest challenge to eval-

cal or scientific value.” In these situations,

uating government controls on inde-

journalists may run afoul of the laws if

cent or obscene speech is defining the

they publish sexually explicit, but news-

terms “indecent” and “obscene.” The

worthy, material. Or the obscenity laws

United Kingdom’s Obscene Publications

may be used as a pretext to censor other

Act of 1959 (as amended), for example,

material. For example, in Vietnam, the

provides that material shall be deemed

government claims that it filters out Inter-

obscene if “the effect…is, if taken as a

net access only to sexually explicit mate-

whole, such as to tend to deprave and cor-

rial. Yet a 2007 report by the Internet

rupt persons who are likely, having re-

watchdog group OpenNet Init