Who is popular today?

A line needs to be drawn with respect to the sharing of intimate images of people in public.
This includes sharing these images by members of established media entities and people who claim to be media practitioners.
Making this assertion during a virtual meeting of the Senate Select Committee (SSC) on the Sexual Offences (Amendment) (No 3) Bill, 2021 on Monday, Opposition Senator Jayanti Lutchmedial argued this was a case where the rights of victims of alleged sexual offences were greater than the argument for freedom of the press.
Describing the media as an unregulated industry, Lutchmedial said the main goal of the legislation was to protect victims of alleged sexual offences from images of them being publicised without their consent.
"So how do you balance the rights of the media versus the rights of the victims?" Lutchmedial said. "Everybody with a phone is 'media' now."
She included anonymous people who create fake Facebook profiles and pretend to be media practitioners.
"It is really: where do you draw the line?"
While some media organisations may have safeguards to prevent the publication of images of people without their consent, Lutchmedial argued those rules do not govern everyone.
"So if you have to create a stronger defence for the media, then you are automatically, by doing so in this bill, (doing it) for everybody who passes for media now."
She reiterated that the objective of the bill is to "criminalise actions driven by sexual gratification, humiliation and invasions of privacy and causing of distress."
Lutchmedial expected legitimate media practitioners to know exactly what that is and stay clear of it.
She was uncertain whether widening the definition of what constitutes the media or "creating of greater or stronger defences for people in the media is necessary."
She indicated she objected to the issue of intimate images of people being publicised without their consent, on the grounds of its being done in the public interest.
"I thought it was far too wide. Is it in the public interest to know that a person in public life is doing x or y or z in the privacy of their home?"
Lutchmedial said many people are divided about this.
She added that pictures or videos of people taken without their knowledge or consent can create false narratives which may do irreparable harm to personal reputations and characters.
TT Publishers and Broadcasters Association (TTPBA) member Douglas Wilson suggested the bill be crafted to ensure that "the journalists are covered."
Wilson said the legislation makes provisions for the sharing of information on work done by the police, doctors and attorneys.
Referring to written submissions from the TTPBA about how the bill could affect freedom of the press, Lutchmedial said, "There is no absolute right to press freedom as opposed to individual rights."
She wondered how the media felt the legislation was discriminating against them when "essentially it is criminalising private acts and things that happen in private spaces."
The issue of who is a legitimate media practitioner needs to be clearly defined too.
Referring to similar concerns raised by the media about cybercrime legislation, Lutchmedial said, "We can't define everything in law."
Independent Senator Paul Richards cited instances where junior reporters obtain information which could breach this legislation. Richards said it is their duty first to give it to their editors and not to share it with anyone else. He added it was the duty of editors "to keep it and store it, for possible litigation later on."
Richards observed the safeguards which established media organisations have to prevent the publication of fake information do not extend to people or entities who claim to be media.
"The 'we' (media) is not homogenous."
He said there must be a balance between protecting legitimate media practitioners and protecting the rights of victims of alleged sexual offences.
TTPBA member Suzanne Sheppard said, "What you see published and broadcast is the final thing, when we sift out all the things that are not relevant or legitimate."
The issue of sharing images, she continued, directly affects the media's operations. Sheppard said the emergence of social media has seen traditional media being bombarded with a plethora of images, some of which may be fake.
"We find ourselves dealing with some issues that even a decade or more ago, would not have been a concern for us."
Sheppard said some people who are trying to direct attention to any issue send images directly to the media. Such information is not published, she continued, without following the normal practices of journalism, such as investigating the information received.
Referring to cybercrime legislation mentioned by Lutchmedial, Sheppard said the media has raised concerns since 2014 about how that legislation could affect journalists from carrying out legitimate duties. She cited collecting information and gathering images as examples of those duties.
Coalition against Domestic Violence TT president Roberta Clarke said the nature of the image (such as if it is sexual), if it was taken without consent and the motive behind its publication should determine what kinds of images should be shared in public and which should not.
The post Lutchmedial: Draw line on image-sharing in public appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.