Uncategorized

Smash His Camera

by

In the documentary film Smash His Camera, the ethical issue of privacy in photojournalism is brought up. The film, which details the life of infamous paparazzo Ron Galella, addresses the issue of privacy when it pertains to public figures. Galella made a lucrative career out of photographing public figures- even when they did not want to be photographed- but many have criticized him for not respecting privacy. But do public figures have the same right to privacy as ordinary citizens?

One side of the argument states that Galella is perfectly within his rights to photograph public figures while they are out in public, even if they do not wished to be photographed. This argument says that because they are public figures and of interest to the public then it is perfectly acceptable to take their picture, because public is public. The other side of the argument says that why do public figures not have the same right to privacy as everyone else? It also argues that by not respecting public figures privacy, photographers are putting them in harms way.

Historical perspective on this case has often favored the public figure’s side of the argument. In California a law was passed in 2013 that makes it a crime, punishable by a year in jail and a $10,000 fine, for anyone to harass a celebrity’s child to take a picture, even in a public place (USA Today). Another anti-paparazzi law was signed in California in 2011. This law permits lawsuits against media-outlets that pay for and make first use of material they knew was improperly obtained (Huffington Post).

When it comes to paparazzi and public figures, there is really no great answer to solve the problem of invasion of privacy. While I agree with one side that because they are public figures then they do have to give up some of their privacy, I also agree with the other side that paparazzi often go too far in their quest to capture photos. I believe that the solution to this issue is at the hand of the media outlets. If the media outlets did not pay such hefty amounts for the photos of celebs then the desire to become a paparazzo would decrease- and in turn decrease the amount of harassing done to the public figures.

The ramification of this issue on journalism is severe. The laws passed in California are placing limits on the freedom of the press and the first amendment. If this issue gets larger and more and more public figures express outrage over their loss of privacy then the laws could become larger- placing more restrictions on the press as a whole. In order to save the rights of the press, the issue of privacy and public figures must be resolved in a way that benefit both sides.

 

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/13/anti-paparazzi-law-signed_n_318163.html

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2014/03/22/celebs-push-back-against-the-paparazzi/6186163/