Private Life Of Celebrities Essay
The First Amendment of the “invasion of privacy statute” was passed in 2005, which regulated that the profits from photos taken during altercations between celebrities and photographers will be forfeited. B 524 stated that up to ,000 penalties would be charged from the first publishers of the photos taken in the ways that violate the privacy statute.
This law aimed to stop the paparazzi who take private photos of celebrities for profit-gaining reasons.
Jens Hoffman has argued that, 'Celebrity attempts to sacrifice their privacy for publicity may result in a loss of legal protections, as celebrities claiming that an invasion of privacy by the press could be seen as utilizing media in order to achieve or maintain fame'.
Lee had sued Internet Entertainment Group (IEG) and Paramount for broadcasting a story in 1998, that contained excerpts from the tape, however the court considered her as voluntarily sacrificing her privacy in order to publicize herself.
Paparazzi photographs of these children are frequently posted in magazines, sometimes with friends or family, and often portray the celebrity and children's fame and lifestyles as high-quality and luxurious.
These images can be either authorized or unauthorized.
It has been suggested that celebrities "remain conscious of maintaining a public persona when they are in the public eye as opposed to a personal one in private" and "negotiate with the press to release staged private life photos".In Portugal, the Law for Protection of Children and Youth at Risk (LPCJP in Portuguese acronym) protects children from media that brings risky elements, such as violence or inhumanity.Besides, The Young Offenders’ Law prohibits media from identifying youngsters from 12-16 who commit illegal actions.In 1998, California set the “invasion of privacy statute”, which prohibited the use of digital devices to take photos of celebrities on private occasions.However, this statute is criticized by opponents who believe it might inhibit the freedom of the press to gather news.According to Ray Murray's research, some paparazzi will “draw an ethical line” by abiding by specific rules and in a series of paparazzi interviews, most of the participants claimed that they would not break the law, and some attested that they would not take any photo of celebrity children without consent.Scholar Andrew Mendelson argues that paparazzi are valuable in that they reveal potential mismatches between the public image and the reality of celebrities who possess great power in contemporary society, which legitimizes the paparazzi's invasion of celebrity privacy as a form of watchdog journalism.Celebrity privacy refers to the right of celebrities and public figures, largely entertainers, athletes or politicians, to withhold the information they may be unwilling to disclose to the public.This may often specifically pertain to personal information which includes addresses, family relations,romantic relationships among other data that can be used to identify the individual.In October 1997, Princess Diana died from a car accident in France which was suspected to be caused by seven paparazzi.Although the judge clarified later that the drunk driver rather than paparazzi caused the accident, California government was aware of the danger brought by paparazzi and thus quickly set the first anti-paparazzi law.