The Skeptic Next Door

Last week there were two high profile stories involving celebrities and the media.

In one case Jamie Lynn Spears avoided 100 paparazzi and 50 airline employees with the help of the airport police.

The second is Kanye West freaking out at LAX.

While I believe in freedom of the press. I am not certain that many “news shows” really count as news any more. They are purely entertainment packaged as news and driven by profit.

Is it really necessary to have one hundred reporters at the airport to capture the relevant news of a new mother arriving? LAX security claims that they do not normally treat celebrities different than other people but in this case they were concerned that the baby could be harmed in a crush of the dedicated news hounds.

If there was an effort to reduce this madness, the media would of course scream about their first amendment rights. Interestingly the first amendment is fairly simple:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

These are not absolute freedoms. There are restrictions on freedom of speech when safety is involved. The classic example is you can not yell fire in a crowded theater. Some religious practices are illegal. Local governments require permits for some types of assemblies. It follows that the media does not have carte blanche.

On the other hand people are being placed at risk, by the mobs of paparazii. In many cases the “reporters” are just trying to provoke a reaction, by yelling names or asking annoying questions. Most people would attribute Princes Diana’s death to avoiding the paparazzi. Britney drove with her child in her lap. Traffic laws are violated.

The dictionary definition of free press is that the press is free to express any opinion. It is not that they should be able to place individuals at risk or to invade people’s privacy in their own homes.

From cambridge.org

free press noun [U] If a country has a free press, its newspapers, magazines and television and radio stations are able to express any opinions they want, even if these criticize the government and other authorities:

This has little to do with TMZ and its kin. Admittedly in the case of many celebrities, their celebrity depend on the media. Its easy to believe that they are getting what they deserve. However, this does not just apply to celebrities. Sarah Palin’s daughter is pregnant. It is not her fault her mother is running for Vice President. Is there any doubt that there will be a media circus when the baby is born. At least she will have the secret service to keep the press at bay.

While important, I think an argument from safety is spurious. More fundamentally there is a lack of basic human respect from these journalists. I would not respond well to dozens of cameras shoved in my face. Neither would most people. Imagine being a suspect for a high profile crime.

Society restricts obnoxious and harmful behaviors. For example, there are restrictions on smoking, noise pollution, and traffic laws. The media should not get a free pass in these areas. The blanket argument that they must get the story at any cost really only applies in a few cases.

It can also be argued that the media is just giving the people what they want. This may be true but that is not news, it is a business decision. Clearly, if pictures of Janet Jackson sunbathing topless were not valuable marketing tools, there would be fewer individuals trying to get such pictures. Janet’s nipples have not cause major disruptions in the economy or for the government to fail. Such news items are not a opinions of the press. They are marketing tools.

The press of press has gotten worse, and is likely to become more so. As technology advances the media will only become more invasive. The future holds, microscopic cameras with virtually unlimited storage or constant internet links. Miniature aerial drones with built in cameras and many other advancements.

At what point does it become too much. With the price of DNA test dropping, soon the dedicated reporters are going to start acquiring DNA samples and reporting celebrity DNA results. Maybe Britney does not have the genes to be so well endowed after all! Now that would be news.

Apologies to Xzibit.

Who knew Tom Green could rap.