Privacy versus freedom of speech: the treatment of celebrities in Europe and the United States of America

The right to privacy of celebrities was at the core of the Leveson Inquiry. The Inquiry came about following allegations of unethical practice in the journalism industry, including phone hacking. Alongside scandals involving private individuals, celebrities also found that they had been victims of such unethical practices. Their phones had been hacked, and details of their private lives were published in the press. Celebrities such as Hugh Grant, Sienna Miller and Steve Coogan came forward to give evidence to such violations into their privacy. Celebrities’ lives have always been of interest to the public and the press. This often results in a conflict: the freedom of the press versus the right to privacy.

This thesis will explore whether the law in the United Kingdom is being followed to protect celebrities in a post-Leveson Inquiry era after some came forwards to complain about invasion into their private lives. In order to explore this question, this thesis will engage in a comparative legal analysis, comparing the law of the United Kingdom to the laws of France and the United States of America. Preceding this comparative analysis, this thesis shall consider the European Convention of Human Rights and the EU legal framework on privacy and data protection.

While France’s privacy laws are notoriously strict, celebrities in the United States often find themselves with very little protection, except for in California, a state that is considered an exception as a result of its anti-paparazzi legislation. This thesis will take into consideration these jurisdictions’ legal frameworks and case law, in order to examine exactly what protection celebrities are afforded in their private lives and whether it is considered adequate by focusing on case studies involving real life examples of celebrities’ privacy being invaded and questioning if the law is doing enough to protect them.