Law and Ethics Case Analysis: iCloud Hacking Scandal

Ethics is a branch of philosophy that involves classifying, defending and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct, often addressing disputes of moral diversity. Applied ethics draws upon ethical theories in order to ask what a person is obligated to do in a specific situation or within a particular domain of action. With this in mind, ethics seeks to resolves questions dealing with human morality and handles concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, virtue and vice, and justice and crime (Fieser, J. 2009). However, ethics differs from law with many experts arguing that doing the legally right thing may not be the ethically right thing to do. Rather, ethics equips people with the ability to be critical of actions, motivations and others for reasons that have nothing to do with the law (Cranley, E. 2014). Furthermore, the fundamental principles of journalism (honesty, fairness, independence, and respect for the rights of others) are based on respecting the truth and the public's right to information. Without public trust, journalists cannot fulfil their pubic responsibilities of informing citizens and animating democracy (Alliance.org.au, 2014). Moreover, this essay will explore the ethical decision-making process in which entertainment blogger, Perez Hilton, may've endured before he reposted explicit images of celebrities after their iCloud accounts were hacked.

In August 2014, a collection of almost 200 private pictures of various celebrities—mostly consisting of women, and with many containing nudity, were posted on 4chan. The event, which media outlets and internet users referred to under names such as "Celebgate" and "The Fappening", was met with a varied reaction from the media and fellow celebrities. Critics felt that the distribution of the images was a major invasion of privacy for their subjects, while some of the allegedly depicted celebrities questioned their authenticity. The leak also prompted increased concerns surrounding the privacy and security of cloud computing services such as iCloud—with a particular emphasis on their use to store sensitive, private information (Arthur, C. 2014). Additionally, after 4Chan posted the images, Perez Hilton reposted them on his entertainment blog. He later took them down and apologized, saying on Twitter: “At work we often have to make quick decisions. I made a really bad one today and then made it worse. I feel awful and am truly sorry.” He also posted a video apology, saying: “A lot of you let me know that my actions were wrong. I didn’t even stop to think about my actions.” (Beaumont-Thomas, B. 2014). Knowing this, the aim of this essay is to distinguish whether it was ethically right for Perez Hilton to post these explicit images of celebrities based on the fundamental principles of journalism and by applying the relevant ethical theories.

However, the main stakeholders that will be effected by this decision to repost the explicit images need to be identified. Firstly, Hilton needs to consider how the outcomes of his decision will affect his business (his blog), including its employees, and the advertisers that use his blog as a platform. The release of the intimate photos has sparked huge amounts of controversy around the world, and the decision to repost the images could lead to both good and bad outcomes relating to the financial success of his business. Secondly, Hilton will need to consider how the re-release of these photos will affect the celebrities that are depicted. On the other hand, this begs the question of whether or not journalists, including those who report on current events via blogs and social media, are responsible for the well-being of the celebrities and public figures featured in their accounts. Lastly, in business the customer's needs are at the upmost importance, which is why the blog's readership needs to be considered as the public is largely responsible for the success of Hilton's business.

When it comes to applying ethical theories, deontology is an approach that determines goodness or rightness from examining acts, or the rules and duties that the person doing the act strove to fulfill (Alexander, L. & Moore, M. 2007). With this in mind, the Journalism Code of Ethics states that fair, responsible and honest practices must be used when it comes to obtaining material and to never exploit a person's vulnerability. Since the images were stolen by internet hackers as well as depicted the celebrities in a vulnerable situation, the decision to repost the images would appear to be unethical. What's more, the code also insists that journalists respect the privacy of others and resist the compulsion to intrude (Alliance.org.au, 2014). By Hilton reposting the images, it seems he is in breach of the Journalism Code of Ethics as well as making an ethically wrong choice based on the deontological approach. However, the public's right to information is a fundamental principle of journalism, with public interest a primary factor that determines the newsworthiness of a potential story. Knowing this, the final clause in the Journalism Code of Ethics asserts that substantial advancement of the public interest can allow for any standard to be overridden (Alliance.org.au, 2014). Therefore according to deontology, Hilton was making an ethical decision to repost the images because he was fulfilling his duties as a journalist to report on topics that were within the public interest, despite disobeying other ethical standards.

Conversely, because deontology is an ethical position that judges the morality of an action based on the action's adherence to rules, Hilton's decision to repost the images cannot be entirely justified due to its infringement on the celebrity's right to privacy (Hursthouse, R. 2003). The public are guaranteed constitutionally protected rights to safety, privacy and freedom of self-expression, despite the fact that these rights are frequently violated in the case of celebrities and public figures (Barnes, R.D. 2010). Furthermore, some of the prima facie duties listed in Ross's ethical theory also condemns Hilton's choice to republish the images. The duty of reparation, that involves making-up for wrongful acts previously done to others, is violated as Hilton has perpetuated the wrongful acts committed against the involved celebrities. Additionally, the duty of nonmaleficence was ignored as Hilton failed his ethical duty to not inflict physical or emotional injury to others (Ross, W.D. 1930). Moreover, categorical imperative is a central philosophical concept in the deontological moral philosophy of Immanuel Kant that ultimately states that humans should act and treat others in ways that we ourselves would like to be treated (Kant, I. & Abbott, T. 1985). As a result, it can be assumed that Hilton would not want to himself placed in the situation of having private images of himself stolen, posted online, and then reposted by other news platforms. Therefore, his actions cannot be ethically supported by Ross's ethical theory, Kant's categorical imperative nor can they be entirely justified by a deontological approach.

In contrast to deontology, the ethical theory of consequentialism is based on the idea that a action is morally right if it produces a good outcome or consequence, rather than the rightness of the act itself (Mackie, J.L. 1977). For that reason, the question of whether it was ethically right for Hilton to repost the images can be determined based on the consequences that arise. Ethical egoism stems from the consequentialist theory which asserts that the consequences of the individual matter more than the consequences of others (Sidgwick, H. 1962). With this in mind, because Hilton is fulfilling is ethical and professional duty to inform the public of topics that are considered of human interest, the consequences of reposting the images could potentially lead to a higher readership for his blog which would in turn lead to more advertisers and higher advertisement revenue and financial income for Hilton and his employees. On the other hand, the general public might be offended and find reposting the images as an invasion of privacy on the celebrities behalf which may lead to loosing new readership as well as loyal readers who've boycotted the site. Ultimately, advertisers will decide to stop using the site as a platform to market their products which will cause the business's financial income to decrease. Additionally, the decision to repost the images may have legal repercussions because the hacker committed a tort - namely the public disclosure of private facts. Under this tort, "one who gives publicity to a matter concerning the private life of another can be held liable for invasion of his or her privacy if the matter publicized is of a kind that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, and is not of legitimate concern to the public" (About, 2014). Also, a lawyer could argue that these images are not a legitimate concern to the public, as these photos do not contain something that sincerely affects the general public, which means Hilton would be at legal risk.

Moreover, utilitarianism - another form of consequentialism - is an ethical theory that argues the proper course of action is one that maximizes a positive effect, such as happiness, welfare, or the ability to live, to the greatest number of people. Furthermore, 'act utilitarianism' is a principle of utility which is applied directly to each alternative act in a situation of choice. The right act is then defined as the one which brings about the best results (or the least amount of bad results) (Baggini, J. & Fosl, P. 2007). Knowing this, Hilton's act to republish the images would be considered ethical seeing as he created a positive outcome for the greatest amount of people, being himself, his business (employees, advertisers) and the public (public interest). However, there are numerous weaknesses of utilitarianism as an ethical theory, particularly in the aforementioned situation.

Utilitarianism allows individuals to 'sacrifice' others for the greater good, meaning that countless people would be treated unfairly or unjustly so that others can enjoy happiness or pleasure. In the case of reposting the images, Hilton and the pubic are 'enjoying' the results that have rose from the release of the images at the expense of the celebrities involved. As previously mention, privacy is everybody's right and not a luxury and it can be considered unethical to perpetuate this injustice. However, one could argue that this invasion of privacy could be a consequence of fame. People lose privacy via media when they become famous. But people become famous – or, in the language of journalism, become ‘newsworthy’ – for very different reasons. How do we as journalists balance truth-telling with minimizing harm to vulnerable people? If serious efforts were made to make finer balances, there could be several benefits that may arise. Journalists could refine their decision-making processes where privacy is in the balance against disclosure, and privacy protectors could acknowledge, with qualification as necessary, that some people trade privacy for media coverage, and some to a greater extent than others. Therefore, a taxonomy of fame could help remedy the situation of privacy versus public interest (Chadwick, P. 2004).

In conclusion, it's hard you find an answer of whether or not it was ethically right for Perez Hilton to repost intimate and private images on his entertainment blog of celebrities after their iCloud accounts were hacked. Based on deontological and consequentialist theories, Hilton was following his duties, as a journalists, to release public interest stories that would benefit himself, his business and the public. Additionally, some would argue that this invasion of privacy is one of the consequences of fame and that the celebrities involved put themselves in the vulnerable situation. On the other hand, weaknesses of utilitarianism show that Hilton's decision would hurt and damage the celebrities involved, which goes against the Journalism Code of Ethics which frowns upon disrespect of others and taking advantage of vulnerable people (2013). Furthermore, when applying deontological theories, Hilton's decision knowingly infringes on the celebrities' rights of privacy, and when applying Kant's categorical imperative it proves that Hilton is perpetuating acts that he would not want done to himself. With this in mind, it can be decided that Hilton's decision to republish the images was not ethical, because it directly violated the subject's right to privacy. Furthermore, Hilton could argue that he was reposting these images because they are in the public's interest, however legal experts have said that these images are not a legitimate concern to the public, as these photos do not contain something that sincerely affects the general public.

Reference List

About, (2014). A Tort Law Response to the Invasion of Jennifer Lawrence's Privacy. [online] Available at: http://privacy.about.com/od/Privacy-Problems/fl/A-Tort-Law-Response-to-the-Invasion-of-Jennifer-Lawrences-Privacy.htm [Accessed 28 Oct. 2014].
Alexander, L. and Moore, M. (2007). Deontological Ethics. [online] Plato.stanford.edu. Available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-deontological/ [Accessed 28 Oct. 2014].
Alliance.org.au, (2014). Media Entertainment & Arts Alliance - Journalists' Code of Ethics. [online] Available at: http://www.alliance.org.au/code-of-ethics.html [Accessed 23 Oct. 2014].
Arthur, C. (2014). Naked celebrity hack: security experts focus on iCloud backup theory. [online] the Guardian. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/sep/01/naked-celebrity-hack-icloud-backup-jennifer-lawrence [Accessed 23 Oct. 2014].
Baggini, J. and Fosl, P. (2007). The ethics toolkit. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.
Barnes, R. (2010). Outrageous invasions. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press.
Beaumont-Thomas, B. (2014). Jennifer Lawrence criticises Perez Hilton over nude photo hack. [online] the Guardian. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/oct/21/jennifer-lawrence-criticises-perez-hilton-nude-photo-hack-vanity-fair [Accessed 23 Oct. 2014].
Chadwick, P. (2004). Privacy and Media--subtle compatibility--five categories of fame.
Cranley, E. (2014). Introducing Ethics.
Fieser, J. (2009). Ethics. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [online] Available at: http://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/ [Accessed 23 Oct. 2014].
Hursthouse, R. (2003). Virtue Ethics. [online] Plato.stanford.edu. Available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/ [Accessed 28 Oct. 2014].
Kant, I. and Abbott, T. (1985). Fundamental principles of the metaphysic of morals. New York: Macmillan.
Mackie, J. (1977). Ethics. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Ross, W. (1930). The right and the good. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sidgwick, H. (1962). The methods of ethics. [Chicago]: University of Chicago Press.