[intopieces]

>A private sex tape shouldn't be newsworthy

What is often shouldn't be.

But that's precisely the question. Who gets to determine what is newsworthy and what isn't?

Can the government decide that independent footage of American soldiers committing crimes abroad is "not newsworthy" and suppress it, sue the organization, demand that it be pulled from the Internet?

Why or why not?

[juandazapata]

A jury composed by citizens decided that.

I don't know you and I share a private sex tape of yours with my huge audience. We all agree that I should end up in jail, but somehow is "not that bad" because it was a company the one who did it? That's not a good example for the kids. Bullies should be punished wether they are a person or a company.

Videos of soldiers committing crimes are proof of a felony. A video of Hulk Hogan having sex or Thiel being gay is private life. Soldiers are funded by our taxes. Apples and Oranges.

[yongjik]

Consider the alternative. Can the government decide that the videotape of a prominent opposition leader (or a leader of a social movement) having sex with his mistress is "newsworthy" material and surreptitiously deliver it to reporters?

Why or why not?

We can't abolish laws solely based on objection that the government can hypothetically abuse it. The government can easily abuse the absence of law, after all.