Privacy versus freedom of expression

Privacy versus freedom of expression The media in their long history have shattered countless reputations and destroyed countless careers. We have driven people to suicide. We have caused immeasurable emotional pain, suffering and humiliation, not only to individuals but to familiesand to entire communities (Goodwin and Smith 1994, p. 280) President of the International Automobile Federation (FIA), Max Mosley sued the News of the World for breach of confidence and was rewarded 60,000 pounds as compensation on winning the case. The Sunday journal clandestinely filmed Mosley taking part in an orgy with five prostitutes in a Chelsea flat and splashed it all over the paper and the web. The paper alleged that the orgy had a Nazi theme to it and broke the news with the outrageous headline F1 BOSS HAS SICK NAZI ORGY WITH 5 HOOKERS. This brings forward the everlasting debate over privacy versus freedom of expression. Archard (1998: 83) claims that Privacy has to do with keeping personal information non-public and undisclosed. Freedom of expression on the other hand, upholds the rights of all to express their views and opinions freely (Freedom Of Expression {online} link: http://www.hrea.org/index.php?base_id=147: accessed 22.12.09). However, the extent to which the privacy of Max Mosley has been intruded into by the family newspaper is unacceptable in my opinion. There are certain parameters to the freedom of press that have to be maintained and this was certainly indecent and unethical scheming on the part of the News of the World. International supermodel, Naomi Campbell filed a case against The Daily Mirror for breach of her right to privacy. The paper disclosed that she secretly attended meetings of Narcotics Anonymous. It was in public interest to publish that she was a drug addict and that she was being treated for it but where she was being rehabilitated, what her reaction to it was and surreptitiously collecting photographs of her leaving after a treatment session, was going much too far. Therefore, the judgment in favour of Max Mosley, Naomi Campbell and similar cases like Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta Jones versus Hello! Magazine do not chill press freedom but only draw a line minding the excesses of the media. This would lead the press into focussing on meaningful news coverage and control any digression into agenda based news reporting for exciting the public. As Legal analyst Joshua Rozenberg said the court ruling in favour of the FIA President was a warning to journalists.(Mosley Wins Court C ase Over Orgy, 2008 {online} available from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7523034.stm : accessed on 16.12.09) Alongside this will limit the power the media has over peoples minds and life altogether which has been misused for profits in this and other similar cases. Subsequently, I would like to point out that, be it the motor racing chief or any celebrity nobodys personal life can be made a public spectacle. Big names are liable to the public to some extent but filming somebodys intimate moments followed by a so-called newsworthy piece published about his/her sexual interests is objectionable. I found here a creeping sense of commercialism considering the choice of story and the sensationalised language used in it by NOTW. Many in the media arena agree with US journalist Carol Marin who claims we are afraid of being unpopular, we are afraid of shrinking markets.'(CJR forum1998, p. 3). Also whatever Mosley may do in his personal life, as long it does not affect his work or as far as he is not merging his professional life with his personal life he is free to pursue whatsoever. News of The World seems to be thriving on the idea if it bleeds, it leads- they did not consider it essential enough to translate the German spoken in the video to under stand what it said, tagged it as having Nazi undertones and rashly threw it open for the public to watch. Clause 10 of the code of practice of The Press complaints commission Clandestine Devices and Subterfuge, sets a ban on the use of hidden recording devices as a method to gather information unless it were the only way to disclose a public interest story. The method used by the tabloid to bring out the story was inherently flawed it is his personal life and the defence of public interest is altogether irrelevant. There is no harm in being a part of such a scenario between consenting adults on private property. Paying an informant to secretly record the orgy was one thing but along with that drawing metaphors like the alleged Nazi connections was completely appalling. On this point I would like to elaborate that basing a persons actions and drawing conclusions keeping in mind his family history is completely unfair and is a very narrow outlook to a situation. As Mosley told Mr Justice Eady on his first day of giving evidence in the High Court, All my life I have had hanging over me my antecedents, my parents and the last thing I want to do in some sexual context is be reminded of it.(2008) In Quotes: Mosley Trial, The BBC, link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7510193.stm: accessed 18.12.09. Having the blood of a Nazi supporter and founder of the British Union of Fascists, Sir Oswald Ernald Mosley should not imply that even Max Mosley has the same offensive beliefs and ideology. It is entirely unjustified to back up Mosleys story of having a Nazi-style orgy and defame him by digging out some facts like insulting family history or any similar far-fetched connections that encourage a hostile impression of him. The News of the World stole my image and my dignity, said motor racing boss to the BBC. The humiliation caused to Mosley and his family is irreparable. There seem to be clear formulas adopted by newspapers covering such stories they create a hype which boosts the demand for such papers. This is meddling too much with Mosleys personal life and such a story is no ones business. Had Max Mosley made a speech before the public that had Nazi implications to it or had he influenced any third person with his supposed Nazi loyalty then it would fulfil the public interest defence for publication. In this case, it was an extremely personal set-up and even if it was a Nazi oriented one it is his personal life behind closed doors it is clearly of no interest to any outsider. In Nick Davies book Flat Earth News (2008), he has referred to such irresponsible journalism as churnalism. Journalists have a huge responsibility towards man and unfortunately this is being overlooked by focussing on sensational news. I would end with something that Mr. Roy Greenslade says, No better reason to be a journalist than to make a change in peoples lives.

Journey To Self-Destruction in Ken Keseys One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest :: One Flew Over Cuckoos Nest

Journey To Self-Destruction in One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest In One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, the character of Randle P. McMurphy undergoes a gradual journey towards self-destruction. His actions go from the minuscule, such as changing minor ward policies, to the act of trying to strangle Nurse Ratched. All of his actions, minor and major, lead to his self-destruction. He continues this behavior even after he discovers he's only hurting himself with his actions. McMurphy begins by protesting minor but significant defects of the ward policies. When he first arrives, he runs around in nothing but a towel and provokes shock and anger from the Big Nurse. His actions let the nurses and patients know that he won't simply sit back and take the staff's cruel treatment to get the patients to conform quietly and without protest. He begins to gamble with the patients, first for cigarettes and eventually for IOUs, despite the nurse's rule of no gambling on the ward for money (Kesey 102). He also convinces the spineless Dr. Spivey to allow the patients to open up a separate day room for their card games. He uses the doctor to implement these changes, which aggravates the nurse because it takes away her power. The resentment between McMurphy and Nurse Ratched continues to build. McMurphy brings about all these changes before he realizes one vital fact: Nurse Ratched is the sole determiner of how long he must stay in the ward. He's watching television while everyone else is completing their chores. The nurse says to him, "You're committed, you realize. You are ... under the jurisdiction of me...the staff...Under jurisdiction and control-" (138). The nurse also says, "Keep in mind that Mr. McMurphy is committed. The length of time he spends in this hospital is entirely up to us" (150). McMurphy relaxes slightly; however, he eventually continues to harass the nurse, despite his knowledge that she dictates the length of his confinement (Waldmeir 425). He crosses the line and throws a party on the ward in the middle of the night, bringing in two prostitutes and intoxicating the patients with a mixture of cherry flavored alcohol and codeine cough syrup. He does so knowing that he will face consequences for this event. However, he feels he must continue this self-destruction in order for the other patients to find themselves and their sense of freedom ( 427).

Divorce Bill Essay

Underpinning this proposal is a commitment to the policy of the State to protect and strengthen marriage and the family as basic social institutions, to value the dignity of every human person, to guarantee full respect for human rights, and to ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men. In the Filipino culture, marriage is regarded as a sacred union, and the family founded on marriage is considered as a fount of love, protection and care. Philippine society generally frowns upon and discourages marital break-ups and so provides cultural and legal safeguards to perserve marital relations. Cultural prescriptions and religious norms keep many couples together despite the breakdown of the marriage. But the cultural prescriptions for women and men differ. Women are traditionally regarded as primarily responsible for making the marriage work and are expected to sacrifice everything to preserve the marriage and the solidarity of the family. While absolute fidelity is demanded of wives, men are granted sexual license to have affairs outside marriage. Yet when the marriage fails, the woman is blamed for its failure. Reality tells us that there are many failed, unhappy marriages across all Filipino classes. Many couples especially from the marginalized sectors, who have no access to the courts, simply end up separating without the benefit of legal processes. The sheer number of petitions that have been filed since 1988 for the declaration of the nullity of the marriage under Article 36 of the Family Code (commonly known as â€Å"annulment†) shows that there are just too many couples who are desperate to get out of failed marriages. Even when couples start out well in their marriage, political, economical and social realities take their toll on their relationship. Some are not prepared to handle the intricacies of the married life. For a large number of women, the inequalities and violence in marriage negate its ideals as the embodiment of love, care and safety and erode the bases upon which a marriage is founded. The marital relations facilitate the commission of violence and perpetuate their oppression. Official figures in 2009 showed that nineteen women were victims of marital violence everyday. Among the different forms of violence and abuse against women committed in 2009, wife battery ranked highest at 6,783 or 72% according to the Philippine National Police (PNP). The Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) likewise recorded marital violence as highest among different forms of violence against owmen at 1,933. Previous reports of the PNP about three of ten perpetrators of violence against women were husbands of the victims. Husbands accounted for 28 percent of the violence against women crimes. Given these realities, couples must have the option to avail of remedies that will pave the way for the attainment of their full human development and self-fulfillment and the protection of their human rights. Existing laws are not enough to guarantee and protect these rights. To quote the Women’s Legal Bureau, Inc. , a legal resource NGO for women: â€Å"The present laws relating to separation of couples and termination of marriage are inadequate to respond to the myriad causes of failed marriages. Particularly, the remedies of declaration of nullity and annulment do not cover the problems that occur during the existence of marriage. Legal separation, on the other hand, while covering problems during marriage, does not put an end to marriage. † â€Å"Though both divorce and a declaration of nullity of a marriage allow the spouses to remarry, the two remedies differ in concept and basis. A declaration of nullity presupposes that the marriage is valid from the beginning and the court declares its non-existence†¦ Beyond [the] grounds specified [in the law], declaration of nullity is not possible. † â€Å"In annulment, the marriage of the parties is declared defective from the beginning, albeit it is considered valid until annulled. The defect can be used to nullify the marriage within a specified period but the same may be ignored and the marriage becomes perfectly valid after the lapse of that period, or the defect may be cured through some act. The defect relates to the time of the celebration of the marriage and has nothing to do with circumstances occurring after the marriage is celebrated. In annulment, the marriage is legally cancelled, and the man and woman are restored to their single status. † â€Å"Since August 3, 1988, couples have been given a way out of failed marriages through Article 36 of the Family Code†¦Ã‚  The remedy provides under Article 36 is declaration of nullity of the marriage. The article voids a marriage where one party is â€Å"psychologically incapacitated† to comply with the essentials of marital obligations. Consistent with the concept of void marriages (where the remedy is declaration of nullity), the law requires that the incapacity must have existed at the time of the celebration of the marriage†¦ In practice, Article 36 has become a form of divorce, as valid marriages are declared void every day in the guise of â€Å"psychological incapacity. The innumerable Article 36 cases brought to trial courts is an indication of the elasticity of Article 36 to accommodate the needs of many couples desiring to terminate their marriages. It is proof that divorce is needed in the Philippines. Article 36 provides a remedy only for spouses who can prove â€Å"psychological incapacity†. The concept certainly cannot accommodate all cases where divorce would be necessary. What we need is a divorce law that defines clearly and unequivocally the gr ounds and terms for terminating a marriage. That law will put an end to the creative efforts played daily in courtrooms across the country to accommodate a wide range of cases in order to prove â€Å"psychological incapacity. † (Women’s Legal Bureau, Inc. , The Relevance of Divorce in the Philippines, 1998) Thus, the bill seeks to introduce divorce as another option for couples in failed and irreparable marriages. The bill was crafted in consultation with women lawyers and inspired by the studies and inputs of various women’s groups and the experiences of spouses gathered by GABRIELA from its various chapters nationwide. The bill seeks to introduce divorce in Philippine law with a strong sense of confidence that it will be used responsibly by Filipino couples. This confidence stems from the experiences of Filipino families that show that separation is usually the last resort of many Filipino couples whose marriage has failed. Cases of battered women also support this. Battered women invariably seek separation only after many years of tring to make the marriage work. Separation only becomes imperative for them when they realize that it is necessary for their and their children’s survival. Divorce could actually provide protection to battered women and their children from further violence and abuse. With the predominance of the Catholic faith in the Philippines, the fear that divorce will erode personal values on marriage appears unfounded. The experience of Italy, where the Vatican is located, and Spain, two predominantly Catholic countries which practice divorce, supports this. Those countries have a low rate of divorce. Italy registers a 7% rate while Spain registers 15%. The figures reflect the strong influence of religious beliefs and culture on individuals in deciding to terminate marital relations. Historically, divorce had been part of our legal system. In the beginning of the 16th century, before the Spanish colonial rule, absolute divorce was widely practiced among ancestral tribes such as the Tagbanwas of Palawan, the Gadangs of Nueva Vizcaya, the Sagadans and Igorots of the Cordilleras, and the Manobos, B’laans and Moslems of the Visayas and Mindanao islands. Divorce was also available during the American period, starting from 1917 (under Act No. 710 enacted by the Philippine Legislature), and during the Japanese occupation (under Executive Order No. 141) and after, until 1950. It was only on August 30, 1950, when the New Civil Code took effect, that divorce was disallowed under Philippine law. Only legal separation was available. The same rule was adopted by the Family Code of 1988, which replaced the provisions of the New Civil Code on marriage and the family, although the Family Code introduced the concept of â€Å"psychological incapacity† as a basis for declaring the marriage void. In recognition of the history of divorce in the Philippines, the farmers of the 1987 Philippine Constitution left the wisdom of legalizing divorce to the Congress. Thus, the 1987 Constitution does not prohibit the legalization of divorce. This bill is respectful of and sensitive to differing religious beliefs in the Philippines. It recognizes that the plurality of religious beliefs and cultural sensibilities in the Philippines demand that different remedies for failed marriages should be made available. For this reason, the bill retains the existing remedies of legal separation, declaring of nullity of the marriage and annulment and only adds divorce as one more remedy. Couples may choose from these remedies depending on their situation, religious beliefs, cultural sensibilities, needs and emotional state. While divorce under this proposed measure severs the bonds of marriage, divorce as a remedy need not be fo the purpose of re-marriage; it may be resorted to by individuals to achieve peace of mind and facilitate their pursuit of full human development. This bill also seeks to make Philippine law consistent in the way it treats religious beliefs with respect to termination of marriage. Philippine law through the Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines (Presidential Decree No. 1083 [1977]) allows divorce among Filipino Muslims, in deference to the Islamic faith which recognizes divorce. Non-Muslim Filipinos should have the same option under Philippine law, in accordance with their religious beliefs. The bill proposes five grounds for divorce. All the five grounds are premised on the irreparable breakdown of the marriage and the total non-performance of marital obligations. Thus, the bill provides that a petition for divorce may be filed when the petitioner has been separated de facto (in fact) from his or her spouse for at least five years at the time of the filing of the petition and reconciliation is highly improbable, or when the petitioner has been legally separated from his or her spouse for at least two years at the time of the filing of the petition and reconciliation is highly improbable. Not all circumstances and situations that cause the total breakdown of a marriage could be defined in this proposed measure. Thus, the bill also provides that divorce may be granted when the spouses suffer from irreconcilable differences that have caused the irreparable breakdown of the marriage. Spouses living in a state of irreparable marital conflict or discord should be given the opportunity to present their marital contrarieties in court and have those differences adjudged as constituting a substantial ground to put an end to the marriage. Another ground for divorce included in the bill is when one or both spouses are psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations. This provision will consequently repeal Article 36 of the Family Code. The bill seeks to include â€Å"psychological incapacity† in the grounds for divorce in the belief that the concept is consistent with the termination of marital ties rather than with a void marriage. This bill seeks to eliminate â€Å"condonation of the act† and â€Å"consent to the act† as grounds for denying a petition for legal separation and, by extension, a petition for divorce. Many spouses especially women ignore the offense because of the social and economic conditions they are in. Many women in the marginalized sectors tend to condone the offense because they are economically dependent on their spouses or because of the stigma attached to failed marriages. Some women who are perceived to be condoning the acts of their husbands actually suffer from the cycle of spousal abuse such that they have become so disempowered to address their situation.

Plato s The On The Interest Of The Stronger Party Essay

Notes: PLATO Justice= in the interest of the stronger party socrates--- just because we are weaker, doesn’t mean we should follow his fitness routine Thrasymachus ----government--- law = best interest †¦.. Justice is doing what is in the interest of the stronger party Socrates Government does not = infallible Sometimes it is right to do the opposite then Thrasymachus--- if you make mistakes, then you are not a skilled craftsman Only a skilled craftsman until you make a mistake Sorcrates Captain of a ship acts in the interest of the crew Medicine acts in the interest of the body Act in the interest of the weaker party PAPER OUTLINE Intro Overview The good will, results, duty Motive of duty Imperatives Illustrations Plato’s First Challenge (above mob mentality) Formulae Only one categorical imperative Law of nature Plato’s Second Challenge (Better to be good than bad) Yes, we are all moral no matter what, it’s reason (must--- contingent imperative) Objection Universal law only works if you think the way everyone else thinks Conclusion An Analysis of Groundwork for Metaphysics of Morals Famous for being thought of as one of the most influential thinkers in the history of Western philosophy Immanuel Kant’s works are extremely thought provoking. The most influential pieces he ever wrote came during his â€Å"critical,† which included, amongst others, Groundwork of Metaphysics of Morals. In his piece, Kant explains morality in through a metaphysicalShow MoreRelatedThomas Hobbes And Plato s The Leviathan And The Republic1496 Words   |  6 PagesFor almost every word, all philosophers have their own notion towards it’s meaning. This is especially true for the term â€Å"justice†. The philosophers Hobbes and Plato both exhibit their own beliefs towards its interpretation through their respective stories, the Leviathan and the Republic. Instead of simply stating his view, Plato takes it to another level. He brings up a multitude of possibilities for the meaning of justice, arguing with himself and shooting down his own theories. The purpose o fRead MorePlato s View On Justice1261 Words   |  6 PagesWell-structured societies are built on a foundation of justice that brings unity, development, equality and respect between people. Throughout The Republic, Plato defines justice and its significance to the state and its individuals. In Book I, Thrasymachus and Socrates both provide their views on the definition of justice. The discussion takes place in Cephalus’s residence with his son Polymarchus. Through Plato’s dialogue, the definitions on justice by both Thrasymachus and Socrates will be discussedRead MoreTopic 1: How Would Your Ideal Society Differ From Plato’S?1179 Words   |  5 PagesTopic 1: How would your ideal society differ from Plato’s? What would Plato think about your proposals? How might you defend these proposals against Plato’s objections? My ideal society is different from the one created by Plato in the Republic in three ways. Firstly, everyone in the city would be able to receive a high-quality education, as opposed to Plato’s idea that only the chosen children who are gifted or show a potential for future ruling can be accepted to the elite education program. SecondlyRead MoreAristotle s Ethics And Plato s The Republic892 Words   |  4 Pagesworks about ancient Gods to more in depth works such as Ethics or The Bible. All of these works show serious teachings about multiple things such as justice, Gods, and philosophy. In my paper, I am going to discuss the concepts of Aristotle s Ethics and Plato s The Republic in order to hopefully achieve whether or not the ideas that have stuck out to me, are true or not. In the book Ethics, by Aristotle, plenty of concepts have stuck out to me, and made me think quite a bit. One of the ideas thatRead MoreAppraisal for Democracy by Plato, Aristotle and Thucydides1743 Words   |  7 PagesAppraisal for Democracy by Plato, Aristotle and Thucydides Plato is one dominant figure in the history of democracy. It is important to note, however, that he is in fact pivotal for the crucial questions he asked about democracy. His character is so strong such that even after veering off the public’ s favor he continues to stress on the cracks of democracy. Although unpleasing to consider his reasonable points, on weakness in democracy that he pointed out continues to disturb me. Plato suggested that, aRead More The Nature of Justice in Society and the Individual According to Plato2338 Words   |  10 Pagesexistence and as such has been discussed by many a philosopher over the ages. Plato discussed Justice at length and this paper will discuss the following questions relating to justice based upon his findings: what is Plato’s account of the nature of justice for the individual, how does Plato build his account, why does Plato take it that the claim made by Thracymachus is altogether mistaken – if indeed he does? Plato finds that justice is the harmonious balance of the three elements of theRead MoreJustice in George Orwells 19841293 Words   |  6 Pagesconcept of justice is an important subject in George Orwell’s 1984. Justice is defined according to Plato as â€Å"the interest of the stronger†. Justice plays a big role in 1984’s society. Justice is understood differently by the protagonists of the text than how it is represented by the societies in which they live. In the novel 1984 by Orwell, an extremely controlling totalitarian government called The Party, rules the society. They have introduced Telescreens which monitor your every movement, conversationsRead MorePluralism vs. Elitism1417 Words   |  6 PagesPluralism vs. Elitism The term lobbying conjures up visions of a cigar-chomping interest group representative, his arm around the shoulder of an important senator or representative, advising him how he ought to vote on some obscure provision of the Tax Code and slipping an envelope, fat with currency, into his jacket pocket. Or it conjures up images of favors given: paid vacations to exotic locations, honorarium payments for brief speeches at association meetings, and other exchanges verging onRead More Plato’s Republic: Justice and Injustice in Thrasymachus Account6580 Words   |  27 Pagesthe tyrant or ruler who sets down laws in the society in order to exploit the many for personal advantage; (c) the stronger individual (kreittoon) or member of the society who is detached from the many and aspires to become the tyrant. Second, I argue that if Thrasymachus’s account of the perfectly unjust life of the tyrant is to be more than a theoretical ideal, then the stronger individual who aspires to the tyrant’s position would do well to lead a double life—namely, pursuing private injusticeRead MoreComparing Plato s The Republic Of 380bce And One Of The Key Themes2021 Words   |  9 PagesPlato wrote the Republic in 380BCE and one of the key themes in the book is the theory of justice (C. D. C. Reeve, 2004). In this essay, we will follow the three main views of justice set out by , Glaucon (Ademantus) and Socrates highlighted in Plato’s The Republic. Whilst Thrasymachus explains a very simple and easily understood view of justice, seeing it as the laws created by the rulers of a city, there is no input from anybody else (Lampert, 2010, p260) In my opinion, Glaucon has a much stronger