The issue of privacy and press freedom is, of course, a timely one in the United Kingdom, given the Leveson Inquiry and the subsequent debate about how best to regulate the British press in the light of the manifest failure of the press to self-regulate via the Press Complaints Commission in the public interest rather than their own. The key question here is often thought to be how to reconcile or balance rights: on the one hand, an individual's right to privacy or informational privacy and, on the other, the right of the media to freedom of expression. Both are alienable rights in the sense that there are instances in which the invasion of privacy is justified and instances where controlling expression is justified. This is best approached via the concept of public interest that should stand at the pinnacle. Is press disclosure of private matters or invasion of privacy in the public interest or not? The answer to this question, of course, is both case dependent and reliant upon a sound normative conception of public interest. If disclosure is in the public interest, then freedom of expression trumps privacy rights; if not, then privacy rights trump freedom of expression.
展开▼
