643
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2023
643 points (96.8% liked)
Not The Onion
12355 readers
776 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
~~No, HIPAA only applies to people who work in the health sector or are associated with it. Anyone else, including journalists and media people don't have to follow these rules. They can talk about the healt status of others as they please. The only concern would be defamation but that's also only an issue if the statement is false.~~
While HIPAA doesn't apply in this case, it's irrelevant. It could still be considered Publication of a Private Fact which is punishable under US law.
It's unlikely this would be successful but there is enough grounds for a lawsuit to not be thrown out immediately.
Is it still a private fact when Fox News has (or at least had in 2021) a well-publicized vaccine requirement for employees?
I don't think so. I also don't think that a reasonable person would be offended by having their vaccination status disclosed. So winning a potential lawsuit would be unlikely.
But I think there is enough grounds to at least have it go to trial. While claiming a HIPAA violation wouldn't even make it that far since it doesn't apply here.
The logic against HIPAA doesn't apply. Boebert claimed asking her on air was a violation so it was then spouted by every viewer after that.
There's also defamation per se which can apply to salacious details like HIV status and some other things I can't remember (that class was a long time ago and I spent all my time in title 26) where even if the info is true, it's still defamatory. I've only skimmed this article but I like generally Cornell Law Library.
I read through it but defamation per se still talks about false statements. The difference is that you don't have to prove damages.
But while reading up on it, turns out the first comment was indeed right. Publication of a Private Fact can be punishable even if the statement is true.
It's very questionable wether the statement fulfills the requirements. It's already publicly known that FOX employees require vaccinations and it's doubtful disclosing this fact is offensive to a reasonable person but there is at least some potential here.
So then why do we have to watch those horrendous videos on the disclosure of PHI, even in non-related fields? I do it yearly and have been Clockwork-Orange-educated into knowing what it looks like, how it should be transmitted, etc.
It really makes me think the company would be liable in some way.
I believe that the non-disclosure applies to companies or individuals who have a relationship with a person as a client, or some other kind of business relationship. My doctor or insurance company has to protect my medical information, but if my neighbor finds out I'm rocking just one nut, he can tell anyone he wants.
Are you rocking one nut or are you slandering yourself?
Yes.
That would depend on your work. Maybe you are working for a company that is associated or a subcontractor with the health care industry.
An accountant overseeing the finances of a small clinic or a contractor doing renovations in a hospital both have to abide by HIPAA to a degree.