NATURAL LAW
Application of Natural Law
The Primary Preceps
1. To live and to protect the innocent. If publishing information protects victims or prevents any further wrongdoing, it aligns with this precept. However, if publishing harms innocent people or violates privacy for no good reason other than entertaining readers, it would be morally wrong.
2. To reproduce and educate the young – If publishing this information educates society about an important issue that will morally benefit them (for example, the danger of corruption or the fact that politicians lie), it serves the second precept. However if it spreads misinformation or makes them less likely to follow natural law, it would be unethical .
3. To worship God – Natural Law is based on God's moral rules, so if publishing is driven by greed (making more advertising by increasing views) or exploitation it would contradict this precept. However, if it reveals injustice, it would be ethical.
4. To live peacefully in society – A peaceful society needs to be based on harmony, order and moral integrity. If publishing the information exposes corruption and protects justice, it makes sense to publish according to this precept. However, if unnecessary chaos is caused and the publishing ruins social harmony, it would be unethical.
5. To preserve life – If publishing private information saves lives (for example, revealing that somebody is hiding a cue for cancer, or that somebody else is poisoning the water supply), it's justified. However, if revealing private details puts someone in danger, perhaps by increasing the risk that they may be attacked, it would be morally wrong.
The Secondary Precepts
Aquinas believed that we can apply our reason to work out Secondary Precepts that will tell us how to fulfil the primary precepts in particular contexts. For example, the second primary precept can be translated into the real world by a secondary precept: "Provide children with a proper education to the age of 18".
When it comes to publishing and privacy, a Natural Law follower could create the following secondary precepts:
1. 'Sensitive information should only be published if it serves justice and prevents harm' – exposing information is done for common good rather than personal gain.
2. 'Journalists must verify their sources and information before publishing private information' – this prevents misinformation
3. 'Privacy must be respected unless revealing the information protects the public or prevents wrongdoing' – This balances justice with human morals.
How useful is Natural Law in relation to publishing sensitive information?
In my opinion, natural law is idealistic and better suited for a perfect world. However, in our complex and evolving society, especially with the fast paced nature of the media, it can be difficult to apply practically. Natural Law does provide clear moral guidelines and ensures that information is only published if it serves justice rather than just profit. The flexibility of secondary precepts allow some adaptation to ethical dilemmas, like balancing privacy and public interest. However, when two of the principle moral duties in Natural Law clash (truth vs privacy), it can struggle to solve the issue without contradiction. It is also hard to apply the precept that talks about preserving life because sometimes people may get very angry towards a criminal or murderer who is exposed by journalists.
While it does provide moral virtues, the structure of the natural law approach means that it struggles to navigate the nuances of modern journalism.