• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >When freedom of the press and privacy collide: Reconciling conflicts between fundamental democratic values.
【24h】

When freedom of the press and privacy collide: Reconciling conflicts between fundamental democratic values.

机译：当新闻自由与隐私冲突时：调和基本民主价值观之间的冲突。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

After Florida Star v. B.J.F. in 1989 applied a constitutional privilege for truthful publications of lawfully obtained information on matters of public significance, some scholars suggested Florida Star signaled the end of the disclosure tort, and perhaps other areas of privacy law. One legal scholar, however, warned that the Court's creation of narrow privileges in Florida Star and its progeny threatened "to erode both press freedom and the public's right to know." Such debate clarified that privacy torts addressing emotional harms resulting from publication directly conflict with the First Amendment right to publish.;This dissertation analyzed if and how state high courts and federal appellate courts have reconciled free press values and privacy values when those sets of values conflicted in post- Florida Star privacy tort cases. It examined cases involving two publication- or publicity-based privacy torts---disclosure of private facts and appropriation---to identify how courts have attempted to reconcile these two sets of values considered fundamental in our democratic society.;The analysis found that most rulings did not discuss clashes between free expression and privacy rights because the appeals were simply based on claims that lower courts erroneously applied the elements of the torts. And only about half of the rulings did discuss or imply at least one democratic value undergirding free expression or privacy rights.;If courts attempted to reconcile clashes between press freedom and privacy, they typically sought to identify the boundary between categories of privileged disclosures and categories of tortious disclosures and determined whether the facts at issue fell into the category of privileged publications or into the category of invasions of privacy. In those cases, courts typically found published information was protected under privileges for matters of public interest associated with audience-based free expression values.;In fact, courts only ruled in favor of plaintiffs in cases involving non-media defendants when at least one privacy value was harmed and no free expression values were promoted. This dissertation concluded that the U.S. Supreme Court should establish a broader constitutional privilege for publications of matters of public interest by individual communicators as well as by the news media.
机译：在佛罗里达之星诉B.J.F. 1989年，对合法出版的合法获得的具有公共意义的信息的真实出版物申请了宪法特权，一些学者认为，佛罗里达之星标志着披露侵权行为的终结，也可能标志着隐私法的其他领域。然而，一位法律学者警告说，法院在佛罗里达之星及其后代中狭narrow特权的创建威胁着“侵蚀新闻自由和公众知情权”。此类辩论澄清说，解决由出版引起的情感伤害的隐私侵权行为与《第一修正案》的出版权直接冲突。本论文分析了当这些价值观冲突时，州高等法院和联邦上诉法院是否以及如何调和了自由新闻价值和隐私价值。在后佛罗里达之星隐私侵权案中。它审查了涉及两个基于公开或基于公开的隐私侵权行为的案件-披露私人事实和侵占-以确定法院如何试图调和这在我们的民主社会中被视为根本的这两种价值观念;分析发现，大多数裁决没有讨论自由表达与隐私权之间的冲突，因为上诉仅基于声称下级法院错误地适用了侵权要素的主张。而且只有大约一半的裁定讨论或暗示了至少一种基于自由表达或隐私权的民主价值观。如果法院试图调和新闻自由和隐私之间的冲突，他们通常会试图确定特权披露类别和类别之间的界限。侵权披露，并确定争议的事实属于特权出版物类别还是侵犯隐私权类别。在这些情况下，法院通常会发现与基于受众的自由表达价值相关的公共利益，已发布的信息受到特权保护。事实上，法院仅在涉及非媒体被告的情况下裁定有利于原告，且至少有一项隐私权价值受到损害，没有提倡自由表达价值。本文的结论是，美国最高法院应建立更广泛的宪法特权，以保护个人传播者和新闻媒体对公共利益事项的出版物。

著录项

  • 作者

    Coyle, Erin K.;

  • 作者单位

    The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.;

  • 授予单位 The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.;
  • 学科 Journalism.;Law.;Mass Communications.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2010
  • 页码 240 p.
  • 总页数 240
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号