Should celebrities have their right to privacy? Before newspapers, television, and the internet, ordinary people were not exposed to endless stories about celebrities. Today, however we are bombarded with information about who is dating whom, where they eat, and what they wear from magazines such as People, Entertainment Weekly, and Star. Also, most ordinary people respect the rights of others to a private life. However, some people are just obsessed to get information out of celebrities. They want to know everything about them and have a desire for more information. Celebrities should have their right to privacy due to historical/practical rights, their invasion of privacy with paparazzi, and their children’s rights to privacy. They are ordinary people just with a famous role in life.
Historical/practical rights are one of the biggest issues and it all started back in colonial America. In colonial America, privacy was constrained. Colonial homes were often crowded, affording little privacy. There have been many events about privacy since 1639. In 1787, the U.S. Constitution was written declaring it does not contain an express right of privacy, in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3, the Constitution mandates that a census be conducted every ten years. Critics of the census regard it as a threat to privacy (Right of Privacy Time).
In September 25, 1789, the First Amendment protects people’s privacy of beliefs without government intrusion. The Fourth Amendment protects one’s person and possessions from unreasonable searches and seizures. On February 1, 1886 in Boyd v. U.S. Supreme Court recognized the protection of privacy interests under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. In the 1890s, the legal concept of pri...
... middle of paper ...
....
Goodale, Gloria. "Is California Going Too Far to Protect Celebrity Kids from Paparazzi?." Christian Science Monitor. 25 Sep. 2013: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 07 Feb. 2014.
Henderson, Ky. "How Kim Stays On Top." Cosmopolitan 250.8 (2011): 46. MasterFILE Premier. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f5h&AN=64417117&site=ehost-live
Jones, Steve. "Michael Jackson Dies at 50." USA TODAY. 25 Jun. 2009: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 30 Jan. 2014.
Lazarus, David. "Bieber Has Point on Paparazzi." Los Angeles Times 2013 jan 04: B.1. Web. 3 Dec. 2013. .
ProQuest Staff. "At Issue: Privacy and the Press." ProQuest LLC. 2014: n.pag. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 30 Jan. 2014.
Puente, Maria. "Are the Children of Stars Fair Game for Paparazzi?" Usa Today 2012 aug 15: D.1. Web. 3 Dec. 2013. .
Marshall P. David (1997). Celebrity Power; Fame in Contemporary Culture. May 16, 2010. Electronically retrieved from
...uld be justifiable to emphasize that a good number of them find it sickening to miss the limelight. . Nonetheless, it goes without mentioning that celebrities get exploited because some gossip stories explore the things that would otherwise be considered to be private.
A U.S. citizen's "right to privacy" was first discussed in an 1890 Harvard Law Review article in which two Boston lawyers, Louis Brandeis and Samuel Warren, defined it as "the right to be let alone." Since then, the right to privacy has provided the basis for a stream of revolutionary and controversial constitutional interpretations by courts across the United States, culminating in the U.S. Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. Although decisions have come down in favor of a right to privacy, they are largely based on a broad and disputed interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment. With the plethora of privacy issues that confront courts and policymakers in the current information age, the time for an amendment specifying the inalienable right to privacy is quickly approaching.
After observing and researching all the sources portraying celebrities I have came into a conclusion that todays society it seems like all we want is to be accepted and we tend to look at other people and judge. Its not right, we all are different and thats what makes the world go round. It would be a pretty boring world if we were all the same. Celebrities deal with this everyday, I think the paparazzi know more about some celebrities lives than they actually do. They judge them for who they are and what they do, it is not right nor fair.
Privacy rights are a tough issue to argue for because so many Americans believe that they do in fact hav...
Celebrity has the hardest job for being some remodels to children. They have to make sure they stay on the right track, and be a respectable represented to the children. Sometimes being a celebrity can be a struggle. Some celebrity has relationship problems, which they need to hide away from tabloid, since it the problem can progress from rumors.
The word “privacy” did not grow up with us throughout history, as it was already a cultural concept by our founding fathers. This term was later solidified in the nineteenth century, when the term “privacy” became a legal lexicon as Louis Brandeis (1890), former Supreme Court justice, wrote in a law review article, that, “privacy was the right to be let alone.” As previously mentioned in the introduction, the Supreme Court is the final authority on all issues between Privacy and Security. We started with the concept of our fore fathers that privacy was an agreed upon concept that became written into our legal vernacular. It is being proven that government access to individual information can intimidate the privacy that is at the very center of the association between the government and the population. The moral in...
In addition, if someone was fallowing you, taking pictures and bullying you every day single day, you would instantly report them to the police and they would without a doubt get the stalkers arrested, and they would get a restraining order. But if a celebrity calls the cops saying that there is someone following them and harassing them, no one is willing to protect them, because they are not able to stop the paparazzi for good. It 's like all celebrities are being punished for being rich and successful. Nobody deserves
...paparazzi the opportunity to make a living. The balance must also be one that will allow creative expression by these artists. But there must also be restraint. Allowing the celebrity to go about a somewhat normal life when on private property, at a child’s school function, at the funeral of a loved one, would go a long way toward making this a functional relationship. Perhaps the most important issue is allowing for the safety of celebrities and their families. In the end, the insatiable demand for more and more information about the lives of the celebrity is driving a dangerous frenzy around these talented people. In the end, perhaps the bigger challenge is this—how do we teach people to live and appreciate their own fulfilling lives rather than spending so much time and money living through others? Might this be the true solution to this problem?
But lets focus on a more specific facet of sensationalism. Where do the children of celebrities stand in this issue...
The privacy of the individual is the most important right. Without privacy, the democratic system that we know would not exist. Privacy is one of the fundamental values on which our country was founded. There are exceptions to privacy rights that are created by the need for defense and security.
The right to privacy is our right to keep a domain around us, which includes all those things that are apart of us, such as our body, home, property, thoughts, feelings, secrets and identity. The right to privacy gives us the ability to choose which parts in this domain can be accessed by others, and to control the extent, manner and timing of the use of those parts we choose to disclose (Privacy Concerns 1). “Everyone has the right for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right…” (Privacy concerns 2). In 1998, the Human Rights Act, the act sets out the fundamental rights and freedoms that individuals have, came into force; it incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 8 which protects the right to private and family life. Was the first time there was a generalized right to privacy recognized by law in this country.
When living their day-to-day lives in the public eye, many celebrities must deal with gossip columnists, the infatuation of stalkers, and the unrelenting paparazzi. They follow celebrities into restaurants, their children’s schools, on vacations, and even their residential neighborhoods (Jones). By seeking out and publishing the whereabouts of celebrities, they cannot be sure who will find or come across that information. The paparazzi ...
Puente, Maria. "Are the Children of Stars Fair Game for Paparazzi?" Usa Today 2012 aug 15: D.1. Web. 3 Dec. 2013. .
For example, an ex-reality television star Heidi Montag from the popular reality television show called ‘The Hills’, she and her husband Spencer Pratt have supposedly called gossip magazines on what is going on with their life and supposedly their truth on what really happened between Montag and Montag’s ex best friend Laruen Conrad a famous fashion designer. A writer named Jamie E. Nordhaus wrote a book called Celebrities’ Right to Privacy: How Far Should the Paparazzi Be Allowed to go, Nordhaus talks about how celebrities use the media for ‘free publicity’, they always want to get their 15 minutes of fame and want the world to know who they are. Usually their ‘publicity stunt’ that they use can sometimes bring them to higher places or sometimes just leave them where they are now. Nordhaus establishes that, “An argument exists that if celebrities expect to use the press for their personal gain they should expect to be used by the press in return” (Nordhaus 307). In other words, Nordhaus believes that if the celebrity shouldn’t act dumb pretending that they don’t know that they are using the