But the time has come for journalists to acknowledge that a zone of privacy does exist.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I believe in a zone of privacy.
I suspect privacy is a very new concept to humanity.
Everything is accessible to everyone all the time, and I think there are wondrous things to treasure with what the Internet has made available to journalists. But I think it's also had some effects that are less pleasant. It has chipped away at a sense of privacy and secrecy.
There's always a sense that people will do things quite differently if they think they have privacy.
It is an odd thing about newspapers that they live by exposure, yet they keep their own worlds concealed.
Historically, privacy was almost implicit, because it was hard to find and gather information. But in the digital world, whether it's digital cameras or satellites or just what you click on, we need to have more explicit rules - not just for governments but for private companies.
The American people must be willing to give up a degree of personal privacy in exchange for safety and security.
I know a lot of reporters certainly will go to jail to defend confidential sources. Some have even gone to jail for an issue like this. But I can't say that's the norm.
It's just as difficult to live in a self-made hell of privacy as it is to live in a self-made hell of publicity.
Most journalists now believe that a person's privacy zone gets smaller and smaller as the person becomes more and more powerful.