Is the publication of leaked private emails justified for the purpose of information?
Source: Composite by G_marius based on a Kheng Cheng TOH's image.
The publication of leaked or stolen information is becoming a growing concern. Is it part of their duty to inform or an example of bad practice.
The cancellation of the the satirical comedy The Interview by Sony has brought much controversy concerning censorship, blackmail, political pressures, cyber attacks and business practices. But this scandal has also brought to light a number of email exchanges revealing information shaming Sony executives, such as the lower pay of female actors or racist comments about Barrack Obama. A number of Hollywood actors have taken a stance against the media publishing these email exchanges, arguing that this is private information that was stolen. Sony has immediately demanded news outlets to stop publishing the information leaked.
But what do you think? Were the media right to release information revealing the darker side of Hollywood? Is publishing leaked information part of the media duty to provide information or is it a violation of their professional standards?
(a) The information leaked is of public concern and the media were right to publish it.
(b) It is morally wrong for the media to publish stolen information and incentivizes hackers
(c) Don't know
If you change your mind, you can change your vote simply by clicking on another option.
Voting results
Is the publication of leaked private emails justified for the purpose of information?
New to netivist?
Join with confidence, netivist is completely advertisement free. You will not receive any promotional materials from third parties.
Join the debate
In order to join the debate you must be logged in.
Already have an account on netivist? Just login. New to netivist? Create your account for free.
