The Photographers Guide to Avoiding Privacy Problems
9 Keys to Avoiding
Invasion of Privacy Suits
The best hedge against invasion of privacy suits is knowledge of the law in the jurisdiction in which the photograph or videotape is shot and published or broadcast. However, the line between journalism that is protected by the First Amendment and state law, and journalism that creates liability for invasion of privacy, is rarely clear.
Before taking or publishing a questionable picture, a photojournalist might want to consider several factors:
- Generally, what can be seen from public view can be photographed without legal repercussions. Photographs taken in private places require consent.
- Even if people are photographed in public, beware of the context in which the picture is placed (such as an innocuous photo of recognizable teen-agers in a story about the rise of teen violence). Use caution when utilizing file footage or photographs to illustrate negative stories. Special effects can be used to render the subjects unidentifiable.
- If consent is required, it must be obtained from someone who can validly give it. For example, permission from a child or mentally handicapped person may not be valid, and a tenant may not be authorized to permit photographs of parts of the building not rented by the tenant.
- Consent to enter a home may not be consent to photograph it. Consent exceeded can be the same as no consent at all.
- Although oral consent may protect the press from liability for invasion of privacy, written consent is more likely to foreclose the possibility of a lawsuit. However, a subject’s subsequent withdrawal of consent does not bar the publication of the photograph. It simply means that the journalist may not assert consent as a defense if the subject later files suit. In some states the commercial use of a photograph requires prior written consent.
- Permission from a police department to accompany officers who legally enter private property may not immunize journalists from invasion of privacy suits. In most states, authorities may deny photographer’s access to crime scenes and disaster areas.
- Public officials and public figures, and people who become involved in events of public interest, have less right to privacy than do private persons.
- In some states, using hidden cameras, or audiotaping people without their consent, may invite criminal or civil penalties.
- A photograph may intrude into a person’s seclusion without being published. Intrusion can occur as soon as the image is taken.
Privacy laws vary widely from state to state, and the law often is unclear within a given state. If in doubt about a situation, a call to a media lawyer or to the Reporters Committee may help you assess the risk.
- PHOTOJOURNALISM 101: HOW TO SHOOT LIKE A PRO
- The better I get to know men, the more I find myself loving dogs. —Charles de Gaulle
- The TROJAN HORSE OF AMERICA
- NATO’s Eastward Expansion: Why Russia Resents Us?
- Trump Presidency: A Letter to My Son
- Photographic Journey through Ecuador
- …and There’s Death and Decay
- Farm Aid 30: “Good Food Movement” & Growing Solutions
- In the Name of “Bringing Democracy” to Middle East
- War — The Ultimate Proof of Human Insanity
- Les Camargues “Horsing Around” – a memory made timeless
- In the Name of “Protecting the Public”
- Russian billionaire returns $4.1m Nobel Prize to American geneticist
- Radiation at Fukushima
- American Heart: 9/11 Tenth Anniversary
- Première: Free Speech & Transcendent Journey of Chris Drew
- Book Review – The Boston Marathon Bombing Memorials