'Dirty little secret': Journalism, privacy and the case of Sharleen Spiteri

Morton, T

'Dirty little secret': Journalism, privacy and the case of Sharleen Spiteri

Morton, T

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Pacific Journalism Review, 2012, 18 (1), pp. 46 - 68
Issue Date:: 2012-01-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	2011008118OK.pdf		1.49 MB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Morton, T https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4255-2992	en_US
dc.date.issued	2012-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Pacific Journalism Review, 2012, 18 (1), pp. 46 - 68	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	1023-9499	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/22742
dc.description.abstract	In both the Australian and British debates about media ethics and accountability, a key question about the News of the World phone-hacking scandal was whether or not the law should provide stronger protection for individuals from invasion of their privacy by news organisations. There is no explicit reference to privacy in the terms of reference of either Britain's Leveson or Australia's Finkelstein inquiries. It can safely be said, however, that invasions of personal privacy by NOTW journalists were an important element in the political atmospherics which lead to their establishment. This article also asks where that dividing line should be drawn. However, it approaches the issue of privacy from a rather different perspective, drawing on a case study from relatively recent history involving Sharleen Spiteri, an HIV+ sex worker who caused a national scandal when she appeared on television in Australia in 1989 and revealed that she sometimes had unprotected sex with her clients.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Pacific Journalism Review	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.24135/pjr.v18i1.289	en_US
dc.title	'Dirty little secret': Journalism, privacy and the case of Sharleen Spiteri	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	1	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	18	en_US
utslib.for	1903 Journalism and Professional Writing	en_US
utslib.for	1902 Film, Television and Digital Media	en_US
utslib.for	2001 Communication and Media Studies	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences/Journalism Program
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.issue	1	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	18	en_US

Abstract:

In both the Australian and British debates about media ethics and accountability, a key question about the News of the World phone-hacking scandal was whether or not the law should provide stronger protection for individuals from invasion of their privacy by news organisations. There is no explicit reference to privacy in the terms of reference of either Britain's Leveson or Australia's Finkelstein inquiries. It can safely be said, however, that invasions of personal privacy by NOTW journalists were an important element in the political atmospherics which lead to their establishment. This article also asks where that dividing line should be drawn. However, it approaches the issue of privacy from a rather different perspective, drawing on a case study from relatively recent history involving Sharleen Spiteri, an HIV+ sex worker who caused a national scandal when she appeared on television in Australia in 1989 and revealed that she sometimes had unprotected sex with her clients.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/22742