Public vs Private:
In an ever growing age of celebrity obsession, it seems that any detail of a celebrities life is worth the front cover of a magazine, or headline of a news bulletin. But how far is too far. The arguments of publications such as TMZ and Entertainment Tonight, is that there is public interest and because these people (the celebrities) are seen as role models and cultural trend setters. Thus, they must be held accountable.
They are considered fair game for inquiring journalists, because they have entered the public life. But is this true?
I would argue that:
Celebrities: Drugs, sex tapes, bad behavior = yes! Let the world know, it is their fault, and as people who are often looked up to they need to be made accountable. Obviously, everyone makes mistakes, me included, but if you are going to take good publicity and use it to your advantage, be prepared for bad publicity.
Family struggles - such as marriage breakups, deaths etc, sure, report them but they have a use by date, and report them with the due care and integrity that such emotionally challenging things should be treated.
Journalists, and the general public need to consider the newsworthiness. Does anyone even care anymore that Jeniffer doesn't speak to Brad anymore? Or that Paris has yet another muscle bound handbag rack to dote over her?
Then of course, there are times when I think it is absolutely vital to hold accountable politicians and business people for their actions. They are the policy makers and people who run large businesses. However, the publication of such issues need to be within the topic. In other words, there is great relevance in outing a minister for family who is having an affair, because he/she is directly responsible for the policies surrounding family values, which this minister is obviously showing poor moralistic fiber.
Ultimately, these people, both celebrities and politicians are in the public eye and make their money from the public. As such, they should be held accountable for their actions, however, I think there needs to be some level of conscience involved. If we think of it from our own point of view, wouldn't we want some privacy for certain matters, and it not to be told in such a black and white way?
Robbie, I agree with your view that public figures should be held accountable for their actions. That being said however, I think that public figures also deserve a right to privacy.
ReplyDeleteThere is a very fine line between what is deemed public and private for public figures. However, I take the view that if it is a personal matter that does not harm the public (such as self harm or a family illness for example) then that information should remain private.
I think it is becoming increasingly more difficult for journalists to decipher what is in the public interest rather than what is of personal interest. I think at the end of the day it is up to the individual journalist to use their discretion and ethical standards to determine whether information should be released to the public or not.
I agree with everything you've written and think that maybe putting yourself in the shoes of the person on the receiving end and asking yourself how you would feel if it were written about you is a good foundation to work from. As we know, the guidelines don't always 'guide' you and a lot of it boils down to your own moral decision. Still not an easy solution!
ReplyDeleteGood piece Robbie.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think that you have hit this one on the head. It is hard to know where the line should be drawn; and I think because we have gotten so used to seeing it be crossed and privacy being invaded more and more the lines are becoming very blurred.
Imagine if there were set structurea and rules as to just how far someone can go regarding personal privacy.
I am interested to see if the internet will impact this in any way - maybe a global restriction or something.
News is news, but 'public interest' stories need to be left as just that and not thrust into the spotlight that is serious news.
Mark, the set structure would be interesting. Do you think that if there was one, defamation cases would go through the roof? Or do you alternatively think they will have the alternative effect and create less due to stricter rules and guidelines?
ReplyDeleteI think that a system which made privacy laws increasingly strict would be hard to police for one thing because of the amount of money involved in defamation cases.
What are your thoughts guys?
Kate, I agree it is becoming so hard to even set a definition of what is public interest. This seems to be a re occurring theme as I wrote about in my blog titled 'You can't handle the truth'.
It is quite the frustrating topic area, and its good to get a variety of opinions out.
Thanks guys!