Privacy and Speech

  • Chris Berg
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Classical Liberalism book series (PASTCL)


This chapter argues that there is a close relationship between freedom of speech and privacy. Private spaces offer a protected domain in which individuals can test and experiment with ideas between intimates. The perception of being observed or surveilled acts as a limitation on free expression. The chapter also considers one widely discussed tension between free speech and privacy—the exposure of details about the private life of public figures. The chapter concludes that where these tensions exist, keyhole solutions that target behaviour that occurs in the act of violating privacy is likely to be superior to solutions that limit free expression.


Intellectual Privacy General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Leveson Inquiry surveillanceSurveillance emailEmail 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Azriel, Joshua. “Unconstitutional First Amendment Restrictions against Press and Paparazzi in California: An Analysis of How Sections 1708.8 and 1708.7 of the California Civil Code Infringe on Press Freedoms.” Communications Lawyer 32, no. 2 (2016): 5–11.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, C Edwin. Human Liberty and Freedom of Speech. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.Google Scholar
  3. Barrell, John. The Spirit of Despotism: Invasions of Privacy in the 1790s. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
  4. Berg, Chris. In Defence of Freedom of Speech: From Ancient Greece to Andrew Bolt. Monographs on Western Civilisation. Melbourne and Subiaco, WA: Institute of Public Affairs and Mannkal Economic Education Foundation, 2012.Google Scholar
  5. ———. “An Institutional Theory of Free Speech.” SSRN, 2017.Google Scholar
  6. Bingham, Adrian. Family Newspapers? Sex, Private Life & the British Popular Press 1918–1978. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.Google Scholar
  7. Briscoe, Daren. “The Giving Back Awards: 15 People Who Make America Great.” Newsweek, 2 July 2006.Google Scholar
  8. Cobb, Stephen. “New Harris Poll Shows Nsa Revelations Impact Online Shopping, Banking, and More.” WeLiveSecurity, 2 April 2014.Google Scholar
  9. Douglas, Michael, “Questioning the Right to be Forgotten.” Alternative Law Journal 40, no. 2 (2015): 109–12.Google Scholar
  10. Electronic Frontier Foundation. “Eff Files 22 Firsthand Accounts of How Nsa Surveillance Chilled the Right to Association.” News Release, 7 November 2013.
  11. Fawcett, Julia H. Spectacular Disappearances: Celebrity and Privacy, 1696–1801. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2016.Google Scholar
  12. Finkelstein, Ray, and Matthew Ricketson. “Report of the Independent Inquiry into the Media and Media Regulation.” Australian Government, 2012.Google Scholar
  13. Gerety, Tom. “Redefining Privacy.” Harvard Civil Rights—Civil Liberties Law Review 12, no. 2 (1977): 233–96.Google Scholar
  14. Gerstein, Robert S. “Intimacy and Privacy.” Ethics, 89, no. 1 (1978): 76–81.Google Scholar
  15. Habermas, Jürgen. Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Translated by Thomas Burger and Frederick Lawrence. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1989.Google Scholar
  16. Kim, Irene L. “Defending Freedom of Speech: The Unconstitutionality of Anti-Paparazzi Legislation.” South Dakota Law Review 44 (1999): 275–318.Google Scholar
  17. Larson III, Robert G. “Forgetting the First Amendment: How Obscurity-Based Privacy and a Right to Be Forgotten Are Incompatible with Free Speech.” Communication Law and Policy 18, no. 1 (2013): 91–120.Google Scholar
  18. Lee, Edward. “The Right to be Forgotten v. Free Speech.” I/S: A Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society 12, no. 1 (2015a): 85–111.Google Scholar
  19. Lee, Matthew. “Strict Liability and the Anti-Paparazzi Act: The Best Solution to Protect Children of Celebrities.” Hastings LJ Online 66 (2015b): 1.Google Scholar
  20. Leveson Inquiry. “Report into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press.” London: Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport and Leveson Inquiry, 2012.Google Scholar
  21. Locke, Christina M. “Does Anti-Paparazzi Mean Anti-Press: First Amendment Implications of Privacy Legislation for the Newsroom.” Seton Hall Journal of Sports and Entertainment Law 20 (2010): 227.Google Scholar
  22. Locke, Christina M., and Kara Carnley Murrhee. “Is Driving with the Intent to Gather News a Crime-the Chilling Effects of California’s Anti-Paparazzi Legislation.” Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review 31 (2010): 83.Google Scholar
  23. Locke, John. “Liberty of the Press.” In Locke: Political Essays, edited by Mark Goldie, 329–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  24. Mill, John Stuart. On Liberty. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1982. 1859.Google Scholar
  25. PEN American Center. “Chilling Effects: Nsa Surveillance Drives U.S. Writers to Self-Censor.” PEN American Center, 2013.Google Scholar
  26. Reis, Harry T., and Phillip Shaver. “Intimacy as an Interpersonal Process.” In Handbook of Personal Relationships, edited by Steve Duck, 367–89. John Wiley & Sons, 1988.Google Scholar
  27. Richards, Neil. Intellectual Privacy: Rethinking Civil Liberties in the Digital Age. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2015.Google Scholar
  28. Schwartz, Louis B. “On Current Proposals to Legalize Wire Tapping.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 103 (1954): 157–67.Google Scholar
  29. Sennett, Richard. The Fall of Public Man. London: Penguin Books, 2002.Google Scholar
  30. Thomson, Judith Jarvis. “The Right to Privacy.” Philosophy & Public Affairs (1975): 295–314.Google Scholar
  31. Travis, Alan, and Charles Arthur, “EU Court Backs ‘Right to Be Forgotten’: Google Must Amend Results on Request.” The Guardian, 13 May 2013.Google Scholar
  32. White, Gregory L., and Philip G. Zimbardo. “The Chilling Effects of Surveillance: Deindividuation and Reactance.” In ONR Technical Report, Office of Naval Research, 1975.Google Scholar
  33. Wilcox, Zooko. “Zcash’s Zooko Wilcox on Why He Believes Privacy Coins Will Be Used More for Good Than Bad.” By Laura Shin. Unchained, 27 March 2018.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chris Berg
    • 1
  1. 1.RMIT UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations