Not Every Journal Entry will Remain Private

By: Sarah Harrison

According to the Reporter's Committee for the Freedom of the Press, Cynthia Moreno, a University of California at Berkley student, published a journal entry to her MySpace page expressing vehement distaste for her hometown Coalinga, California.  The entry remained on her page for approximately one week, before she voluntarily removed it. 

However, a local principal Roger Campbell, saw the posting and sent it to the Coalinga Record for publication.  The paper published the entry along with Moreno’s full name.  The MySpace entry reportedly caused such a stir in the local community that, according to the Reporter's Committee for the Freedom of the press, in the court's opinion, the “Moreno’s family received death threats.”  In fact, as a result, the family “eventually moved away,” the Reporter's Committee continued.

Now the Moreno family is filing suit against the newspaper and Principal Campbell for invasion of privacy under the embarrassing public fact tort and for “the intentional infliction of emotional distress.” 

After losing in lower court, the Moreno family has taken the case to the appellant court in California to once again try their case.  According to court representatives, as reported by the article, “in order to successfully prove invasion of privacy . . . the plaintiff must show that private information was disclosed.”  However, since the information was taken from MySpace, a public social network, the court is having trouble believing that this information was in fact private.  

 

Questions:

1.  Since MySpace is a public social network, was Cynthia’s entry private information, or is the information private since it is posted solely to her personal page?  What implications would this then have for the publication of her entire name, since her identity is clear on MySpace? 

2.  If the case continues, the Moreno family will need to prove that the principal’s actions were “extreme and outrageous” in order to prove infliction of emotional distress.  How could the family make such claim?