After all, they’re only giving us what we want: proof that celebrities are imperfect, just like us. As long as images of the rich and famous committing foibles both minor and monstrous continue to arrest our attention - and sway our online traffic and magazine purchases - the paparazzi mobs will continue to swarm and snap. With the cultural appetite for celebrity voyeurism, it’s questionable whether the public is even concerned about anti-paparazzi legislation. On the other hand, if the laws become too restrictive, then the freedom of the press could be jeopardized, and for that reason, a judicial tension remains between the two. If laws are left as they are, a celebrity's privacy - and, in some cases, his or her life - may continue to be endangered by the ruthlessness of some photographers. The controversy surrounding anti-paparazzi legislation comes down to the question of where to draw the line between legitimate news gathering and invasions of privacy.
#Paparazzi pictures free#
If photo captions imply something false or libelous about the person in the photo, then they aren't legally protected free speech. Even editorial photographs can come under scrutiny when a caption is added.Photography isn’t legal in these situations without permission.
Police crime scenes, disasters, fires or riots are considered secured emergency areas.
0 kommentar(er)
