The significane of this research becomes more valuable when we see it in the light of the recent drive of "sting operations" by the media.
Though I personally believe that by exposing people who are corrupting the moral fabric of the nation media can do a great job but targeting few people alone will not serve the purpose. Further, as far as possible the media rights must be reconciled with the privacy rights of the others. The privacy rights of others can be overshadowed only if the same is mandated by a more demanding "public interest". The exposing of people who are exploiting others, whether by exploiting there body, mind, property or reputation, should be undertaken at all costs. This is not only supported by the concept of right to information of the citizens but equally acceptable on the grounds of "investigative journalism" and "whistleblowing".
The media must, however, not "build stories" or go for "story hunting" but must undertake the exercise in a more natural manner. The dividing line is though thin but real and fine. For instance, two consenting adult member's private moments cannot be captured by the media under the garb of investigative journalism or whistleblowing. But if the consent is obtained by force, fraud, undue influence, coercion, false promise, etc then it ceases to be a free consent. There is nothing wrong in exposing such people no matter however "high" they may be.
The media must also take care of the fact that they do not indulge in "media trial" when the matter is pending in the court.
If the media respect the privacy rights of others and avoid the media trial, then it can help in forming a moral and civilised society. Otherwise, it will keep on influencing the opinion of the public at large, but in a negative and undesirable manner.
PRAVEEN DALAL, CONSULTANT AND ADVOCATE, DELHI HIGH COURT.