Law on Mass Media, 7th Exercise, Deadline April 7, 2019

Law on Mass Media, 7th Exercise, Deadline April 7, 2019 Monday 11:59pm
The 7th Exercise is on: Limits to a free press/ right to publish/ freedom of expression: Search for any news report or news feature from 2010 to 2019 on the right to privacy of individuals as a limit to a free press/ right to publish/ freedom of expression – the story should illustrate any of the pertinent laws and cases discussed in class last week. 

18 thoughts on “Law on Mass Media, 7th Exercise, Deadline April 7, 2019

  1. Jim Paredes leaked ‘private’ video
    https://www.rappler.com/entertainment/news/227183-jim-paredes-statement-viral-video

    On April 1, 2019, a leaked sex video allegedly involving APO Hiking Society member Jim Paredes began circulating online. At first, many thought of it as an April Fool’s Day prank and even Paredes himself commented it was fake when immediately question about the video.

    Hours later, he admitted that the video was actually real however, he had nothing to do with its leakage. He stated that he believed that the leakage of the video was politically motivated as Paredes is known to be a critic of the Duterte administration.

    The leakage of this video can be considered a criminal offense under the Anti-Voyeurism Act of 2009 which prohibits the the publishing or broadcasting of photos or videos that feature sexual acts or similar activities without the knowledge of consent of the subject.

    It is not yet known who is liable for the leak. Paredes has already released an official statement and apology on the matter which can be found on his blog: https://jimparedes.com/archives/3275.

  2. Police’s intel list of ACT teachers ‘violates right to privacy’ – January 7 2019
    https://www.rappler.com/nation/220448-police-intelligence-list-act-teachers-habeas-data

    On January 7, a Manila Police District intel memorandum was released which ordered cops to conduct an inventory on educators who are members of the group Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT)

    According to human rights lawyer Romel Bagares, the list that the MPD made is illegal because there is no law that says that being a member of ACT is a crime.

    According to Bagares, the existence of the list means that they’re already violating the teachers’ right to privacy because there is already an admission of a surveillance, which means gathering information without any basis.

    A petition for a writ of habeas data may possibly be filed because of the action made by the MPD.

  3. Cops arrest man over online ‘sextortion’

    https://news.mb.com.ph/2018/07/27/cops-arrest-man-over-online-sextortion/

    Jeffrey Dizon, 30 years old, was charged for violating Republic Act 9995, known as the Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009, punishable by imprisonment of three to seven years and a fine of 500,000 pesos.

    The 22 year-old victim, alias Maria, befriended Dizon through the game Clash of Clans and developed an intimate relationship, leading to Dizon requesting the victim to send her private photos, to which the victim acquiesced.

    It was later discovered that the victim is a married woman, and the ensuing confrontation between the victim and her husband led to their separation. However, after a month, the two had mended their relationship and rescued their marriage which led to the victim breaking up her affair with Dizon.

    This infuriated Dizon and prompted him to harass the victim and continued to demand nude photos of her or he will post the private photos she had sent before in public on Facebook.

    This led to Maria and her husband seeking assistance from an investigative television program which then led to the National Capital Region Police Office (NCRPO) arresting Dizon on July 26, 2018.

  4. Tribeca family loses legal battle against photographer who took their pictures without their consent inside their home — April 2015

    https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/family-loses-legal-battle-photog-pics-article-1.2179583

    The New York Daily News reports in an article dated April 09, 2015, about Martha and Matthew Foster’s family losing the legal battle for privacy rights against Lensman Arne Svenson for taking their pictures inside their own residence through their floor-ceiling high windows, which is across the street from his (Svenson) apartment, for a year without their (Foster) consent. Svenson then proceeds to exhibit the pictures he had taken of the family in a New York gallery titled “The Neighbors.” The court rules that Svenson had neither violated criminal stalking laws nor the family’s civil rights as a New York state law exempts artworks from such subjectivity.

    However, disregarding the New York state law in place, Svenson violated the Fosters’ right to privacy in their own home, under the tort of invasion of solitude, in which someone interferes with someone else’s right to be left alone, as well as the tort of appropriation, or the non-consented use of someone else’s likeness for profit, and the unintentional leakage of the family’s home address to the public, more specifically, to the press.

    This news article also showcases the limitation of a privacy law against freedom of expression. Had there been no New York state law that allows artworks to be over the Sections 50 and 51 of the Civil Rights Law as they are not deemed used for advertising or trade purposes, the court would have ruled such act as a privacy invasion and therefore would violate Svenson’s right to freedom of expression, as guaranteed by the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

    In our local setting, Svenson’s actions violates the privacy law as it publicized the Fosters’ personal data, such as their address, and the privacy right provided under Article 26 of the Civil Code which states that “every person shall respect the dignity, personality, privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons. The following and similar acts, though they may not constitute a criminal offense, shall produce a cause of action damages, prevention and other relief: (1) Prying into the privacy of another’s residence;”.

  5. Student’s Facebook scandal a test case for voyeurism law – March 2011

    https://technology.inquirer.net/38/student%E2%80%99s-facebook-scandal-a-test-case-for-voyeurism-law

    A case was filed against Alexander Rible, a 26-year-old dean in a Metro Manila School after he posted nude and compromising pictures of his student, Annika. The act was violating the law on Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009.

    It was stated in the article that Annika and Rible had a relationship that lasted for six months but when the student broke off from the relationship, it was reported that Rible ‘became vindictive.’

    In seeking revenge, Rible created a new Facebook account using the name of Annika’s husband and posted the compromising and revealing photos of the former student for everyone to see. In spite of the account being taken down, there were still some copies of the photos circulating as some took screenshots of the photos.

    This act is a violation of Section 4-A of Republic Act No. 9995 which states that ‘taking photos or video of a person or group of persons performing sexual act or any similar act and copying, reproducing, publishing and distributing them’ are prohibited.

    Rible was released after posting a P7,000 bail but if found guilty, his penalty is imprisonment of not less than three years and a fine of not less than P100,000 for violating the law.

  6. 42-anyos na lalaking gumahasa sa isang menor de edad, arestado – October 2018

    https://rmn.ph/timbog-42-anyos-na-lalaking-gumahasa-sa-isang-menor-de-edad-arestado/

    A 42-year old spa manager, Charles Morrison, was arrested after raping a 14-year old girl in Marikina City.

    According to the victim, she was forced by the suspect to elope with him, and was blackmailed by the suspect, who took a sexual video of the victim and threatened to spread it if the victim refused to comply.

    Authorities examined the contents of the suspect’s cellphone and saw that it contained 90 pornographic videos.

    The man’s act of capturing on video the victim performing a sexual act, without the victim’s knowledge, is in violation of Republic Act No. 9995, also known as the “Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009”. Section 3 (d) states that. “‘Photo or video voyeurism’ means the act of taking photo or video coverage of a person or group of persons performing sexual act […] without the latter’s consent, under circumstances in which such person/s has/have a reasonable expectation of privacy”.

    The suspect will be facing cases of direct assault, rape, violation of the Anti-Voyeurism Act, violation of the Violence Against Women and Children Law, child pornography, and violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act.

  7. Man nabbed for sharing photo of ex-girlfriend on Facebook – August 13 2017

    https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/158405

    Kayze Ryan Miñoza was arrested in Cebu for allegedly blackmailing his girlfriend by uploading intimate photos of them on Facebook.

    Miñoza was issued with a warrant of arrest by Cebu Regional Trial Court Branch 10 Judge Soliver Peras for violating Republic Act (RA) 9995, or the Anti-Photo and Voyeurism Act of 2009.

    Miñoza’s girlfriend of four years broke up with him because of his demanding attitude, and out of anger, he allegedly created a Facebook account under his girlfriend’s name and photo. He then proceeded to post photos of them having sex. He threatened to post more if the complainant continued to ignore him.

  8. Man nabbed for sharing photo of ex-girlfriend on Facebook – August 13 2017

    https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/158405

    Kayze Ryan Miñoza was arrested in Cebu for allegedly blackmailing his girlfriend by uploading intimate photos of them on Facebook.

    Miñoza was issued with a warrant of arrest by Cebu Regional Trial Court Branch 10 Judge Soliver Peras for violating Republic Act (RA) 9995, or the Anti-Photo and Voyeurism Act of 2009.

    Miñoza’s girlfriend of four years broke up with him because of his demanding attitude, and out of anger, he allegedly created a Facebook account under his girlfriend’s name and photo. He then proceeded to post photos of them having sex. He threatened to post more if the complainant continued to ignore him.

  9. https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/08/21/1844579/pgh-emergency-room-not-public-place-data-privacy-lawyer-says

    PGH emergency room not a ‘public place’, data privacy lawyer says

    Patricia Lourdes Viray  – August 21, 2018 – 11:07am

    MANILA, Philippines — The Philippine General Hospital is a public hospital but it is not a public place and taking videos there risks the privacy rights of patients, doctors and staff, a data privacy lawyer says.

    Although it has public funding, the PGH is not an open space like a park or a town plaza.

    To contextualize what happened, Ramon Tulfo taped a video in PGH when he brought a child to the emergency room and took a video of him with the minor, without the consent of the mother of the victim. Included in the video was a doctor that he claimed to be arrogant in the triage desk, that he cursed and gave him a dirty finger when he is only implementing the hospital rules. Worse is, he posted the video on Facebook and went viral.

    What Tulfo did is a violation of laws that include Data Privacy Act of 2012 and Ethics of Media Practitioners under the 2007 Broadcast Code of the Philippines. It is clear that public places has still impose rules regarding privacy among its patients, doctors, and staff, and not abiding to the protocol will have repercussions to the one who violated the rules, in this case is Tulfo, and to the people caught in the video.

  10. Miss Earth organizer asked to explain data breach

    Ruth Abbey Gita Nov 13 2018

    https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/1773800

    The organizers of Miss Earth were accused by the National Privacy Commission of disclosing the mobile numbers of contestants, leading to cases of sexual harassment. The National Privacy Commission accused Carousel Productions of not having provisions for a Data Protection Officer a detailed data processing system.

    The Data Privacy Act requires companies to have a Data Protection Officer. The act also has penalties for institutions who fail to protect what classifies as private information.

  11. Mag-aaral arestado dahil sa pamba-blackmail
    Posted by ABS-CBN News
    June 6, 2016

    Link: https://news.abs-cbn.com/video/nation/metro-manila/06/06/16/mag-aaral-arestado-dahil-sa-pamba-blackmail

    A medical technology student was arrested after allegedly extorting money from a girl as blackmail not to post her nude photos on the internet.

    The Philippine National Police Anti Cybercrime Group (ACG) raided suspect Lonny Lou Beltran’s condominium unit in New Manila, Quezon City, but failed to find him there. However, the marked money sent by the victim was recovered. Beltran was eventually found and arrested in a computer shop nearby.

    According to PSS Lorenzo Eleazar of PNP-ACG, Beltran was able to successfully convince the victim to pose for nude photos after tricking her with an opportunity to model for a product.

    Beltran was charged with the crime of robbery, extortion and violation of Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act, causing him the possibility to be jailed for ten to sixteen years and to be fined an amount ranging from Php100,000 to Php500,000.

  12. Trump ready to drag Bill Clinton sex scandals into US campaign
    Story by Rappler
    2016

    Link: https://www.rappler.com/world/regions/us-canada/147913-trump-bill-clinton-sex-scandals-us-campaign

    This story narrates how 2016 presidential candidate Donald Trump indicated in an interview that he was ready to drag ex-president Bill Clinton’s sex scandals into the White House campaign, after Democrats lashed out at the billionaire’s Twitter rant against a pro-Hillary ex-Miss Universe.

    This pertained to former US President Bill Clinton’s history of abusing women from 1993 to 2011 – a subject which Clinton claimed was a private matter. This basically entails that he was enforcing his right to privacy. Here, we need to note that Clinton’s wife was running as US president, making her very much a public official. Furthermore, given that the issue involved sexual harassment and assault, this makes it a matter of public interest. Hence, there is a limit on Clinton’s right to privacy, especially given how his wife was running for president at the time. However, we must note that Trump has had a history of abuse as well – making him equally as disgusting. However, legally speaking, he had the rights to call Bill Clinton out for his numerous sex scandals.

  13. Tutor nabbed over alleged sex abuse of his student (May 09, 2016)

    from: https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/784116/tutor-nabbed-over-alleged-sex-abuse-of-his-student#ixzz5kQFS1XSy

    A teacher from Davao reportedly forced his student, a minor, to have a sexual relationship with him in exchange for financial favors. While in the “relationship,” he took sensitive photos of her, but when she wanted to break up with him, he threatened to release the photos on social media.

    In the report, it said that one of the charges to be filed against the teacher is the Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act.

    This can be because according to the act, among the prohibited acts is “to copy or reproduce, or to cause to be copied or reproduced, such photo or video or recording of sexual act or any similar activity with or without consideration.”

  14. https://www.rappler.com/nation/183105-malacanang-saln-redactions-cabinet-members-right-privacy

    In this article, Presidential Spokesman Ernesto Abella said that in public service, “those working in the government, such as members of the Cabinet, still have the right to privacy,” after reports by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) showing that some information in the SALNs of Duterte Cabinet members (as of December 2016) were shaded with black marker ink.

    However, this statement does not count the fact that public officials and figures have to maintain transparency, and public officials are not allowed to withold private information, especially if it is in the best interest of the state. SALNs are documents of public officials which are in the best interest of the public.

  15. https://www.rappler.com/nation/183105-malacanang-saln-redactions-cabinet-members-right-privacy

    Malacañang defends Cabinet ‘right to privacy’ in SALN – Sept. 23, 2017

    In this article, Presidential Spokesman Ernesto Abella said that in public service, “those working in the government, such as members of the Cabinet, still have the right to privacy,” after reports by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) showing that some information in the SALNs of Duterte Cabinet members (as of December 2016) were shaded with black marker ink.
    However, this statement does not count the fact that public officials and figures have to maintain transparency, and public officials are not allowed to withold private information, especially if it is in the best interest of the state. SALNs are documents of public officials which are in the best interest of the public.

  16. https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/may/20/editors-vs-judges-which-right-is-supreme-press-freedom-or-privacy

    This news feature talks about the rage of newspapers against a UK court judgment that endorses the injunction preventing them from identifying a celebrity involved in a three-way sexual encounter.

    On one hand, it is argued that right to privacy must be respected which includes the sexual proclivities of celebrities and on the other, it is argued that right to free speech or press is paramount among the liberties protected in a democratic country.

    The court ruling is also being criticized for being insensitive to the changing of times. The age of internet has practically made privacy an archaic concept owing to the fact that even if courts gag the press from publishing certain information it considers a purely private, such information will anyway find its way in the internet.

    But a more nuanced analysis of the debate revolves around the definition of public interest which when present, the press cannot be prevented from making a story. It is argued that some information, such as the sexual proclivities of celebrities may be interesting to the public but it does not necessarily mean that it is endowed with public interest or that the public may benefit from it.

  17. Quality of PH democracy ‘adversely affected’ under Duterte – February 01, 2018
    Source: https://www.rappler.com/nation/194966-democracy-index-2017-philippines-martial-law-mindanao-affect-quality

    According to information on the account of the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), the rule of President Rodrigo Duterte and his unceasing attacks on media have enflamed the press freedom situation in the country. One of the main reasons was the indeterminate edict of the martial law in the southern state of Mindanao which resulted to a descent of one from our 50th spot in the Democracy Index of 2017. The EIU identified our country’s democracy as “flawed” in its report.

  18. Possession of wiretapped material violates Constitution – Lacson
    Written by: By Mario Casayuran
    Published on: March 8, 2019
    Source: https://news.mb.com.ph/2019/03/08/possession-of-wiretapped-material-violates-constitution-lacson/

    Wiretapped information from foreign sources linking Filipinos to crimes such as illegal drugs is a violation of the Philippine Constitution and the State’s policy to protect its citizens, according to Senator Panfilo Lacson. This is in reference to when Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo earlier said that some of the evidence against politicians in the “narco list” or the list of politicians involved in illegal drugs, came from wiretapped communications provided by foreign countries.

    Lacson noted that under the Anti-Wiretapping Law or Republic Act No. 4200, it is unlawful for any person not authorized by all the parties to any private communication to secretly record such discourse. Furthermore, Section 2 of the law states that it is illegal “to knowingly possess” records or copies of any communication or spoken word conversations through wiretapping.

If the comment posted does not appear here, that's because COMMENTS WITH SEVERAL HYPERLINKS ARE DETAINED BY AKISMET AT THE SPAM FOLDER.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.