SUPREME COURT VICTORY OVER TABLOID SCHLOCK

REALITY-based TV got a reality check this week when the U.S. Supreme
Court ruled that some media ride-alongs violated individual privacy
rights.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, writing for the court in two cases
from Maryland and Montana, cited the "centuries-old principle of
respect for the privacy of the home." Striking a blow against
publicity-happy police who team with zealous reporters and tabloid
producers to enter homes during arrests or searches, Rehnquist said
"the possibility of good public relations for the police is simply not
enough, standing alone, to justify the ride-along intrusion into a
private home."

The increasing spectacle of law enforcement as infotainment has long
worried civil-liberties advocates. And justifiably so. None but the
basest of entertainment aims are served by having cops - with
reporters and photographers at their sides - breaking down doors to
make dramatic public displays of people still presumed innocent.

Some media lobbying groups, usually allied with civil libertarians,
called the rulings unconscionable. But the reasonable decisions still
allow media to accompany police officers as long as they stay outside
when officers enter private property. The First Amendment does not
stand in isolation. It does not allow police and press working
together to abridge the Fourth Amendment right of all people to "be
secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures."

The court rulings draw a welcome line at the front door - and reminds
both police and press that they have no constitutional right to abuse
individual rights in pursuit of cheap thrills and tabloid schlock.