University Report: Utilitarianism Analysis of Media Ethics and Privacy

This report delves into the ethical implications of media practices, specifically focusing on the conflict between celebrity privacy and freedom of speech. The analysis employs the ethical theory of utilitarianism to evaluate whether media actions, such as publishing personal information about celebrities, are morally justifiable. The report examines how media's pursuit of public interest and financial gain impacts celebrities' lives, considering the potential harm caused by the disclosure of private details. Through case studies and ethical reasoning, the report argues that the negative consequences of media actions often outweigh the benefits, concluding that it is ethically wrong to publish personal information about celebrities, thereby advocating for a more responsible and ethical approach to media coverage. The report also references relevant legal cases like Campbell vs. Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd to support its arguments.

Running head: APPLIED ETHICS AND SUSTAINABILITY
UTILITARIANISM – MEDIA
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Authors Note

1APPLIED ETHICS AND SUSTAINABILITY
a. Does media violate the right to privacy of celebrities?
b. Nowadays, celebrities often exist in stressful anxious circumstances. The public is
curious to learn more about their favourite celebrities and for this reason, the media
targets their private lives by attempting to get the burning and most up to date news about
them (Khamis, Ang and Welling 2017). Therefore, the relentless publicity of celebrities,
their private lives are revealed and hold their luxurious lifestyle in the eyes of the public,
which destroys the lives of celebrities. If various landmark cases have been examined it
would be observed that media treats celebrities unfairly. It cannot be ignored that
celebrities also have a private life. They also are not supposed to talk about all the matters
publicly. The choice completely lies on them (Mourao et al. 2015). However, the
personal information about celebrities always revelled by the media without anticipating
the outcomes, and in this way, celebrities are still getting hurt. Many scholars are of the
view that media does this kind of activities under the umbrella of freedom of speech
which is completely unethical because celebrities are also normal individuals like others
(Sterin and Winston 2017). Their work is to entertain the people at large but this does not
mean they do not have private lives. Media does all of these things through newspapers,
broadcasting, magazines and presently by using popular social networking sites. As
publicity and money are necessary for newspapers, magazines, and channels, thus media
takes an active part to reveal the personal information about celebrities because the public
wants to know the secrets of their lives (Johnson, Cooper and Holowczak 2016).
However, in a landmark English case, the court had given its decision differently.
In Campbell vs. Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] UKHL 22 case, MGN had
written stories about Campbell and published her photos by illustrating her Narcotics

2APPLIED ETHICS AND SUSTAINABILITY
Anonymous presence. However, it had been formally declared by Campbell that she did
not take drugs. Accordingly, she sought compensations for breach of trust and
reimbursement under the Data Protection Act of 1998, contending ‘unlawful disclosure of
private information’. The compensation had been awarded by the former judge but in the
Court of Appeal, her appeal of damages against MGN Ltd was dismissed by the court on
the ground that publication of specific sensitive information was admissible in the public
interest, and the journalist had to be granted fair discretion as to how the information was
transmitted. Campbell argued that as the photographs are private therefore its publication
violates her rights to privacy under the law of Human Rights and at the same time this
right overshadowed the right to freedom of expression of the editor under the same law.
However, a delicate line had been drawn by the court between the right to privacy and the
right to freedom of speech.
c. Facts relevant to the analysis of ethical question are:
i) As stated above the public is curious to learn more about their favourite celebrities
and for this reason the media targets their private lives by attempting to get the
burning and most up to date news about them (Khamis, Ang and Welling 2017);
ii) Celebrities are not supposed to talk about all the matters publicly. The choice
completely lie on them (Mourao et al. 2015);
iii) Media does this kind of activities under the umbrella of freedom of speech which is
completely unethical because celebrities are also normal individuals like others
(Sterin and Winston 2017);

3APPLIED ETHICS AND SUSTAINABILITY
iv) For publicity and earning money media takes an active part to reveal the personal
information about celebrities because the public wants to know the secrets of their
lives (Johnson, Cooper and Holowczak 2016);
v) Publication of specific sensitive information was admissible in the public interest, and
the journalist had to be granted fair discretion as to how the information was
transmitted;
vi) A delicate line had been drawn by the court between the right to privacy and the right
to freedom of speech.
d. Utilitarianism is regarded as an ethical theory that promotes actions that encourage
happiness or enjoyment as a whole and condemn actions that cause pain or hurt. The
primary aim of this theory is to make society better (Pattenden and Sheehan 2016).
The persons associated with media or journalists are of the view that media never violates
the right to privacy. It provides normal information, such as childhood life, schooling,
and relationships to the public about their favourite celebrities which indirectly make
them popular.
On the other hand, publishing personal information without taking permission from the
celebrities give the public a chance to make gossip on it which has a great negative
impact on the life of the celebrities.
e. Therefore, from the above discussion, it can be said that media by using its right to
freedom of expression provide information to the public related to the personal life of the
celebrities as a form of entertainment. Unfortunately, this activity tarnishes the repute of
celebrities. The negative impact of media in the life of celebrities overshadowed the
positivity. Thus, it is ethically wrong to publish personal information of the celebrities.

4APPLIED ETHICS AND SUSTAINABILITY

5APPLIED ETHICS AND SUSTAINABILITY
Reference
Johnson, N.A., Cooper, R.B. and Holowczak, R.D., 2016. The impact of media on how positive,
negative, and neutral communicated affect influence unilateral concessions during
negotiations. European Journal of Information Systems, 25(5), pp.391-410.
Khamis, S., Ang, L. and Welling, R., 2017. Self-branding,‘micro-celebrity’and the rise of Social
Media Influencers. Celebrity studies, 8(2), pp.191-208.
Mourao, R.R., Yoo, J., Geise, S., Araiza, J.A., Kilgo, D.K., Chen, V.Y. and Johnson, T., 2015.
European Public Sphere| Online News, Social Media and European Union Attitudes: A
Multidimensional Analysis. International Journal of Communication, 9, p.24.
Pattenden, R. and Sheehan, D., 2016. The law of professional-client confidentiality. Oxford
University Press.
Sterin, J.C. and Winston, T., 2017. Mass media revolution. Routledge.