harassment that includes photographing a child without the permission of a legal guardian. in recent year, children of celebrities have become unintentionally famous in their own rights. suri and apple are known on their first-name basis because of their parents. photographers sell them to an ever growing pool of entertainment companies. they are just kids like any others and i want to protect mine. reporter: celebrity moms testify. we want to take these pictures and not harass our children. that was nischelle turner joining us. paul, i think that behavior is it abhorrent. where do we mesh these two issues? it s a tough problem.
you can say i have no sympathy for celebrities. they buy this life. but a kid under the age of 16 don t buy into this life. they deserve to have a childhood. it s a safety matter, too. absolutely. but then you look at what let s talk about the prince of great britain, george louis alexander, these things are news worthy and that s where the first amendment problem comes in. you have to balance it. the public is hungry for pictures and yet the kids deserve protection. they have a number of different laws that stop them from doing everything they have been doing. is it going to go this far? is this bill going to be successful? what s the prevailing wisdom on it in. well, presently you have privacy law versus news worthiness and we struggle to define what is exactly news worthy. this law is clear in that it defines pictures of children as it protects them so the paparazzi can t take pictures of
the new samsung galaxy s 4.ng you about.that s handy. it s got a front and back camera so you can take pictures at the same time. seriously! yeah - and it s on verizon s network. sweet! we can stay in touch when we go to school next year. that s so great! get the samsung galaxy s 4 for only $148 on verizon - america s largest 4g lte network. walmart.