[Amezarak]

> Cherrypicking your example: Newspapers shouldn’t publish names or images of suspects, so to me this specific example would be a very good thing. Not sure (IANAL) but I think in my country this is illegal already

Why shouldn't they? Why shouldn't the government have to publicize the names and identities of people they arrest so we know they're not doing so illegitimately?

[orwin]

Publishing a name and publishing a likeness is very different.

Especially if the person arrested is accused of immoral acts. In my country we have a very known story from 25 years ago where 18 persons were accused of being pedocriminals. Their faces blasted everywhere, on first page of most journals, on the TV... It turns out 13 of them weren't guilty at all. Issues with psychological pressure on the children and a lot of mistakes made life hell for the accused and ultimately innocent, people, most of them lost part of their life because of that.

[Sparkle-san]

It's definitely a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation. Lots of people have had their reputations ruined by accusations that turned out to be false but people made judgements based on the initial report and then moved on with their life carrying it as fact.

[pjc50]

Publishing the name of someone arrested and then later released without charge could constitute harm to them, even if you make it theoretically illegal to discriminate against them on that basis.

The US use of mugshots is exploitative.

[Amezarak]

Arresting someone without that being widely reported has historically resulted in substantial harm - it's called "disappearing" someone.

[ryoshoe]

The news typically reports arrests based on information provided by a government, but if people are being disappeared by the government you can't really rely on the truth of that info

[wccrawford]

I think there's a difference between the government doing it and the newspaper.

The newspaper can cherry pick who they post about, and spin it however they want. The government should be posting all of them in the same way, with just the facts.

[idiotsecant]

Who's talking about governments? The post you responded to sure never brought it up.

[ninalanyon]

It' specifically illegal in some jurisdictions.