Ueli Schmezer, Marco Rima, Nicolas Rimoldi – Never before have so many “public figures” applied for a seat in the National Council as in this election. For journalists, such celebrities are always a balancing act when reporting. How far can you go? What can be reported about?
Public figures: These are people with a particular level of fame. Lawyers also talk about people in contemporary history. The downside of fame: Because of public interest, the media is allowed to report on them, even if those affected don’t always like it.
It’s not as easy as it sounds. Journalists repeatedly exceed the limits of what is permissible and are subject to legal action. The Klein Report spoke with us Martin Steigerlawyer for law in the digital space at Steiger Legal AG in Zurich, which specializes in media law, among other things.
There is no other star in Switzerland apart from Roger Federer. Is only Federer a public figure?
Martin Steiger: “No of course not. In media law, we distinguish between absolute and relative people in contemporary history. It doesn’t take much to gain relative media notoriety. After his ‘Kristallnacht tweet’, for example, excessive media interest was directed at the then SVP provincial politician A. The High Court of the Canton of Zurich protected website operators and newspaper publishers when they published the name. The Federal Court confirmed the classification from Zurich at the time that A. was a ‘relative person in contemporary history.’
So you can list the name, are there any restrictions on reporting?
Steiger: “There can be restrictions when naming someone. Fame is relative, especially temporal. Sooner or later the ‘right to be forgotten’ comes into play. In this matter, beyond rare exceptions, privacy is nobody’s business. Likewise, privacy is fundamentally taboo. In 2006, the ‘Blick’ published pictures showing the then Federal Councilor Moritz Leuenberger on vacation on the beach in swimming trunks. By the way, a high-profile Federal Councilor can be considered an absolute figure in contemporary history and has to put up with more, but not everything either.
Moritz Leuenberger decided not to sue…
Martin Steiger: “Most media victims choose not to sue for various, often good, reasons. But it can also be expensive for media companies if they are sued for unlawful infringement of personality. The cases’Borer‘ and ,Hirschman“For example, the legal fees alone were expensive for Ringier Publishing!”
But there is also the curiosity of the audience, which media professionals can rely on…
Steiger: “The decisive factor is the overwhelming public interest, not curiosity. The media has a special role in our democratic constitutional state, namely providing objective and independent information to the public. The media are therefore privileged by the Federal Constitution. When journalists ask me for reporting advice, I often ask them: Does the story really need attribution? Is it just primarily about curiosity and reach? Let’s take the example of a caretaker who was fired because he flooded the teachers’ room out of frustration. The story works without attribution or identifying information. The same applies to reporting on court proceedings. Any sanctions will be imposed by the constitutional state and not by the media, social media or search engines.”
And what if the caretaker appeared in the “jungle camp” five years ago?
Steiger: “The question is how the caretaker, who was a relative figure in contemporary history at the time, has behaved since then. If the caretaker no longer sought or accepted media publicity, naming him would be problematic.”
With social media there are more and more “relative celebrities”. Do they all have to worry later about being identified with their real names for small crimes?
Martin Steiger: “In fact, there are many more relative people in contemporary history thanks to social media. And yes, journalists and social media users use the public’s curiosity as an opportunity to produce questionable publications. There are clear limits. For example, in the case of youthful sins that, by definition, occurred a long time ago, especially if the person lives differently today. However, the ‘right to be forgotten’ has a difficult time in the digital space. The prospect of short-term attention often crowds out media and personal ethics.”
2023-10-22 20:05:54
#Lawyer #Steiger #forgotten #difficult #time #digital #space
