I mean, it is. It meets all the definitions, including it being released purely to damage to reputation of the person in the film.
But also, Republicans pretend to be the Party of Morality, and this exposes her as a yet another hypocrite in their ranks. So it is newsworthy. 🤷🏼
But also, Republicans pretend to be the Party of Morality, and this exposes her as a yet another hypocrite in their ranks. So it is newsworthy. 🤷🏼
Comments
wait a sec ...
oh, ish
If she hadn't lied and cast aspersions on the staff, the venue wouldn't have released the video.
“Vaping? You think I got thrown out for vaping? Sure, I’ll go with that.”
People fretted that Google Glass recording them at a bar was invading their privacy.
Some consider videoing a cosplayer at convention without their consent as an invasion of privacy.
Some view being public offline as "private" relative to being online.
Regardless of whether they are "right" or "wrong", might they expect something different?
That's what I find is the #1 cause of arguments online: People defining the same terms differently.
That seems to be a common opinion that many people have today.
Doing a sex act in public destroys any expectation of privacy