In Taiwan, SARS was the most serious infectious disease in hundred years. This disease was temporarily past, but it could anytime come again. We are unusually threatened by unknown diseases in the so-called “risk society”. The limitation of human rights of patients and quarantined persons in order to prevent and control SARS infection is so far in dispute. The purpose of this article is to discuss the conflict between the general right to personality of persons affected by SARS and the freedom of mass media. The general right to personality is invoked to vindicate a personal liberty interest against intrusive activity from state or other people. In accordance with the freedom of mass media, journalists and media companies could defend themselves against encroachment from state or other people. A free mass media is an essential element of a free society. It supplies information and takes orients public debate. This freedom also guarantees the existence of the institution of a free mass media. Although the reporting of mass media is a very important means to prevent and control infectious diseases, but it often results unjustified infringement of human rights. The resolution of this confict must therefore take account of which right is prior to protect. But it is short of general legal standards in “Communicable Disease Control Act” and “Temporary Articles of Prevention and Contingency of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome”. The priority of protection can be only specially decided in each case. A model for resolving the conflict of both mentioned human rights is designed in this article.