Vague "Private Facts" Definition Chills Journalism

This provision defines "private facts" using subjective standards like "intimate detail" and "expected to be kept private" without objective criteria, creating legal uncertainty for journalists reporting on public figures. While it carves out public records and crime information, it broadly protects personal finances and relationships even when relevant to public accountability, placing the burden on publishers to prove exceptions apply. Combined with 47(3) (which makes prior circulation "immaterial"), this lacks the explicit journalism exemptions found in GDPR Article 85 and Commonwealth frameworks, forcing publishers to make risky subjective judgments about what details are "necessary in the public interest" under 45(7).