Kate Middleton: Photos, Privacy, Ethics

 About 10 days ago, the British Royal family was involved in a very publicized invasion of privacy. A French newspaper had published pictures of Duchess Kate Middleton sun-bathing topless while vacationing in a private chateau in Italy. As a response, the Royal family filed a criminal complaint and launched a claim for civil damages. They also attempted to prohibit other publications around the world from also publishing the highly-controversial pictures. But because the "demand" for the pictures was high, and most of the tabloids publishing the pictures expected an increase of profit should they print the pictures, many editors found themselves asking if their actions would constitute as an invasion of privacy and whether it was ethical or not.  

Tabloid journalism has always had a rocky relationship with invading into the private lives of celebrities. The reason behind this lies with money. Tabloid journalism, as the Irish Times puts it, "has nothing at all to do with the public welfare, all is geared [towards] [boosting] circulations and corporate profits at the expense of people's privacy." Since the newspaper in France, The Closer, first published the photographs of Middleton, other magazines such as the Chi magazine in Italy and the Daily Star in Ireland have followed suit. Regarding their controversial decisions and how ethics were involved the Daily Star editor Mike O'Kane told the BBC that "The Duchess would be no different to any other celeb pics we would get in, for example Rhianna or Lady Gaga." Alfonos Signorini, editor of Chi, said that the "shots were a non violation of privacy because they were taken from a public space... the photos are absolutely within the confined of Italian Law." But other papers have taken firm stances against publishing the pictures because they see it as an invasion of privacy and stepping over the line. The Guardian Express newspaper in Las Vegas issued a statement condemning the publications who've published the pictures. The Express said, "Publications like ours can and should promote a boycott of the offending media outlets to let them know that our industry will not condone reckless behavior." 

The question of what constitutes invading personal privacy is one of the fundamental issues of journalism ethics. To define, invasion of privacy is the" intrusion into the personal life of another, without just cause, which can give the person whose privacy has been invaded a right to bring a lawsuit for damages against the person or entity that intruded". As discussed in class, invasion of privacy's place in ethics is that privacy is a natural right of individuals and that "injury can be caused by being seen."  However, while regular individuals have the right to privacy from" "intrusion into one's private affairs, public disclosure of embarrassing private information, publicity which puts him/her in a negative public light, and appropriation of one's name or picture for commercial advantage", celebrities are usually not protected from invasions of privacy because they have already voluntarily placed themselves within the public eye and their activities are considered newsworthy. Thus, although unethical, it is not illegal for these publications to publicize the photos. 

My personal belief is that is a deplorable way for a newspaper to earn money and that if I was making the decision, I would not choose to print the pictures. What makes these pictures so controversial along ethical lines is because of how they were taken. Duchess Middleton was in a private home assuming that she was out of the public eye and that her privacy was completely protected from intrustion. But the photographer who captured the photographs is believed to have been from a side road 500 meters from the pool where Duchess Middleton was sunbathing That should not be a situation where a photographer is allowed to capture things within anyone's personal sphere of privacy. A spokesman for St. Jame's Palace said that "Their Royal Highnesses had every expectation of privacy in the remote house." Duchess Middleton assumed that her privacy was protected since she had not voluntarily placed herself in the public eye. Papers that publish these photographs should be criticized by the public for doing so. By printing these pictures, the publications are showing their ethical views regarding invasion of privacy. And if their reasons behind doing so are deemed valid, then I think that media journalism is on a "very misguided course". 

                                      

The Rise of Online Behavior Targeting

             Since the advent of the internet and its exponentially growing usage, one of the most featured ethical concerns of the internet is that of privacy.  Never before has there been a medium that holds as much personal information about its users as the internet. With the correct skill and knowledge, any individual can get online and hack their way to figuring out specific IP addresses which will subsequently allow them to steal user account information ranging from viewing personal emails to learning bank account numbers.  Yet recently, another concern regarding internet privacy has risen which advertisers are referring to as Internet Geotargeting.

            Essentially, geo targeting is a facet of online behavior marketing used to determine the online location of a website visitor. Internet geotargeting is now the hot trend for advertisers because based off the tracking information they receive, they can determine marketing information about users such as where people live, how old they are, and what their individual interests are. In a 2010 Wall Street Journal article, “The Web’s New Gold Mine: Your Secrets” the author investigated the fast-growing business of businesses spying on internet consumers. 

Numbers Don’t Lie

            A portion of the article addressed the New York Company, Lotame Solutions, and how they use a sophisticated software called “beacon” to capture what people are typing on a website. Lotame then uses this data to package it into specific profiles about groups of individuals and sell it to companies seeking better routes of marketing. Lotame gets so specific with their data packages that companies can even customize what demographic they are seeking and receive the IP addresses of individuals who are, for instance, 21-year-old males who are fans of the Game of Thrones television series on HBO.

                But it is not just Lotame Solutions which is practicing this controversial method of targeting consumers. Online tracking has become a very popular business and hundreds of internet ad networks are constantly following users around the net and watching them to later sell their habits to companies. Even Google, most known for being a search company, is getting into the behavioral advertising businesses. Google has been monitoring its users even as far as noting what they watch on YouTube.  Another internet behemoth, Facebook, was the subject of a  Business Insider study which analyzed how much Facebook is tracking internet activity. The study  concluded that Facebook has over 200 internet trackers around the web which are interested in what users are reading, linking to social media sites, and buying online. 

Mark is always watching

                        It is easy to notice the concerns with this new practice. The level of intrusion into privacy  is unprecedented. The Center for Digital Democracy, which aims for maintaining the personal rights of consumers during the digital age, believes that these companies are attempting to create a science of targeting that learns everything about individuals and manipulates their weaknesses. Other concerns given by critics include that their personal data could be used to discriminate wrongly against them or even exclude them from information and/or opportunities that they might enjoy. And there is always the overarching fear regarding internet privacy that the information gathered by companies could fall into the wrong hands and be used wrongly.

            However, I’m personally in the minority and do not have major issues with this marketing technique. Though, before I explain myself, I would like to state that I don’t necessarily support this new method and I would prefer that advertisers stick to traditional methods rather than more-so invade my privacy. But, there is no doubt that this is the future of advertising. As the internet grows and more corporate giants are being formed from internet startups the revenue from online advertising will also become an industry of massive growth and money. For instance, in 2009, Google collected more than $5 billion in ad revenues. As it continues to invest more in behavioral advertising through online tracking, their advertising revenue stream is surely to increase thereby increasing the draw of online tracking.

            Additionally, most individuals go online for specific reasons and not to just click on advertisements. It will make no difference to me whether or not the banner on Facebook is advertising something that fits to my interests. I would rather have an advertisement for Ski trips in Colorado than for a special coupon on Viagra. I’m more willing to click on an advertisement that fits my demographic than one that doesn’t. Internet companies know this, ad agencies know this, and most consumers probably prefer this. Therefore, I encourage companies to follow the money. In the meantime and as this business evolves, I think it is in our best interests to accept it and continue this conversation by working with companies to address some of the featured concerns while working with them to alleviate the issues and retain the right of privacy for internet users.

            I wanted to research and discuss this controversial debate after the viewing the TED video about phone companies gathering data on their customers and how they create profiles using the information. I had previously been aware of the debate and therefore wanted to research more into the ethics behind this practice. What I found was a massive amount of national news stories and professional sources addressing online tracking for advertising benefits. It is a very interesting debate and one which will be in the public eye for many years to come. As I post in this blog throughout the semester, I will attempt to continue researching the debate and giving my opinion on which side I agree with.