The evolution of computer/privacy concerns: Access to government information held in the balance

Computers are a mainstay of most record systems at virtually all levels of government. The vast accumulation of personal information by governments has raised concerns about the erosion of personal privacy caused by the speed and efficiency of computers. For more than 30 years, realistic and sometimes exaggerated concerns about the proper role of computers in society have driven the public policy debate, resulting in a raft of legislation designed to protect the privacy of individuals about whom government keeps records. But these computer /privacy concerns threaten legitimate public and media access to government records. The dangers to access were underscored by the Supreme Court in a holding that publicly available records regained privacy interests when drawn together in a centralized government computer. In other words, the form in which records were kept rather than their content could control access. This article suggests that understanding the origin and context of the computer /privacy conflict will better prepare access proponents to deal with attempts to curtail legitimate access to government information because of privacy concerns

Public Access to Autopsy and Death-Scene Photographs: Relational Privacy, Public Records and Avoidable Collisions

During the 2001 Daytona 500 NASCAR race, Dale Earnhardt crashed and died. The Orlando Sentinel sought autopsy photographs-public records under Florida law. Legal battles followed. The Florida Legislature passed restrictive legislation to protect the family from the anguish of having the photographs published. This article examines precedent for relational or derivative privacy claims, including the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States in National Archives and Records Administration v. Favish, and focuses on the Earnhardt case and other recent Florida examples of the popular outrage helping to fuel relational privacy claims. The article concludes the Earnhardt state legislation and Favish federal FOIA decision are overbroad, though understandable responses; and, it recommends that access advocates consider supporting legislation allowing inspection, but not copying, of records likely to provoke outrage if released and distributed on the Internet or otherwise

Triggering the first Amendment: Newsgathering torts and press freedom

The recent Food Lion case highlights attempts by those suing the press to short-circuit First Amendment protections by attacking how news is gathered rather than its publication. This article examines recent cases illustrative of this trend, which may have been accelerated by unfortunate statements in a 1991 United States Supreme Court case, Cohen v. Cowles Media Co. Next, the article analyzes and critiques the current state of the law, with particular attention to the somewhat ambiguous issue of when First Amendment scrutiny is triggered. Finally, the article suggests a new analytical framework that provides heightened protection for the press as it goes about the vital process of gathering new

Lowering the Bar: Privileged Court Filings as Substitutes for Press Releases in the Court of Public Opinion

In the civil lawsuit against Kobe Bryant for sexual assault, the judge admonished lawyers for engaging in "public relations litigation"-the use of pleadings to attract media attention and try cases in the court of public opinion. This article examines the legal ramifications of such practices and the doctrines of law that encourage some lawyers and litigants to use pleadings as a form of press release. These include the law of republication and the fair report and judicial privileges as well as the power of judges to gag trial participants. The article concludes that courts have adequate tools to control such practices, and lawyers and public relations professionals can responsibly use court documents to communicate with the public, so long as they do not abuse the judicial process