Smallville's Dilemma: Privacy Rights versus Freedom of Information

One of the most key components of the characters working at the Daily Planet for the television show Smallville, is their allegiance to break the next story by releasing every bit of information possible. While this sounds good in theory, someone is always being hurt financially, emotionally, and even physically by the motive behind such releases. Privacy rights are a topic that cannot be ignored in times where the internet is quickly becoming the primary source of news for most people. According to World Internet Usage statistics, about 30% of the world's population of just over 6 billion people uses the internet. This is a six-fold increase from the 2000 data.

When we see the characters that are seemingly doing the right thing to get information under so-called freedom of information laws, they are usually doing it in some illegal manner claiming the common good. Is this really the freedom of information laws being enacted or is the freedom of information laws used as a cover up for the illegal activity used in gathering spicy information. Entertainers of all kinds have long been found complaining about their privacy rights being violated simply because they chose the career of entertainment. Does this mean that they lose their right to privacy? The paparazzi seem to think so.

As in Smallville, Chloe and Louis is always finding a piece of information hidden in some database that she can use to bring down the bad guys. Then Clark comes and picks up the pieces of the folly driven plot to uncover evil. The pair either together or apart is always breaking and entering, stealing someone's personal file, or downright spying on people to find out what they think they need to find to bring some suspect down. Of course in the show this will always have a positive end for the star and main characters that always end up being the hero, but real life is not so simple.

People are protected by law from illegal search and seizure for law enforcement and the courts, so it would also have to include the media. No one has the right, whether the person is thought to be guilty or not, to have their right to privacy taken, before they are actually found guilty or even arraigned for possible suspicion of guilt. The false idea that media has the rights to hack computers, steal files, or break and enter are false. No one can do this and have that information upheld in any court proceeding. It should and must be tossed out. Now-a-days this information is being posted so quickly to the internet that people are being convicted of information that has not been proven true.

The fact in the matter is that he internet is also helping to propagate this invasion of personal privacy. People are able to hack in and steal the information post it to the internet and then allow sometimes innocent people to be defamed, profaned, and outcast. There has to be a realization of the right to privacy on the internet as well as the person's physical property. While paparazzi are staking a claim on the lives of entertainers though internet investigations, and immediate posting of information with keyword celebrity, they must somehow also be held accountable for their break in the legal trust of society.