First Amendment advocates are concerned that a law proposed in Florida to curb unsavory mug shot sites may hurt legitimate journalism. The sites post mugshots obtained through public records of people arrested, post them online and then obtain payments to take down the mugshots. The law mandates the removal of name, personal information and mugshot of anyone acquitted or whose charges are dropped. Those failing to comply would be fined. Under the law, prominent newspapers including the Miami Herald would be required to remove all stories about the Casey Anthony trial since she was acquitted. (Nieman Journalism Lab, February 25, 2013, by Jillian Stonecipher)
A more detailed account of just how the mug-shot industry operates can be found in David Kravets’ article in Wired, August 2, 2011.
Writing for the Citizen Media Law Project on October 11, 2011, Justin Silverman, discusses the Kravets article and raises the issue of privacy versus the free flow of information. “These companies are now emerging in Florida due to the state’s broad public record laws that allow individual mugshots to be easily obtained,” Silverman observes. “All this openness isn’t necessarily a bad thing. I could quote Justice Brandeis about how well sunlight disinfects, but ultimately it’s a matter of providing information to the public about police activity and those who are arrested for crimes. The lack of privacy is a worthwhile price to be paid for such accountability. But what about the price to be paid for keeping public records, well, less public?” -db