A plastic surgeon used photos of patients before and after surgery in public demonstrations and TV interviews. When these photos were taken, the patient was told that it was "part of the doctor's operating procedure". A year later, the doctor used four photos in a TV program and a speech, and noted the patient's name. People familiar with the patient began to spread the news of her operation after watching the program. The patient was completely "crushed" and fell into "terrible depression". The court held that the patient's privacy was indeed violated. In this case, the defendant argued that plastic surgery can cause reasonable public interests, but the court did not adopt this news value defense reason, arguing that there was no "logical connection" between the news value of the theme and the use of the plaintiff's photos.