- 最后登录
- 2008-8-23
- 在线时间
- 0 小时
- 寄托币
- 1238
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2005-7-8
- 阅读权限
- 25
- 帖子
- 4
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 1002
- UID
- 2114564
- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 1238
- 注册时间
- 2005-7-8
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 4
|
Are the public figures destined to be troubled by the problem of lack of privacy? The question raises several issues about both personal and social problems. I concede that public figures, as normal individuals, to some extent can have their private life. On balance, however, I agree with the point since it is the requirement of both their occupations and the public.
First, my proposition is substantiated by the nature of their job which is of no efficiency, or rather even of no need to exist, if public do not pay any attention to them. Consider, for example, Lincon, the illumenent polititian and president who accomplished the abolition of slavery and avoided the nation’s disintegration. It is through speech around the nation and some moving but true stories---these stories have impressed people, either from north or south, with Lincon’s subliminal figure---that Lincon encouraged the whole nation and wined his preposition great support. Now much information has been left about what Lincon like or dislike, illustrating how people at that time get to know him and trust in him---by enjoying caring about his private life.
Second, another important if not the vital, reason to explain my proposition is the consideration of the role, of growing significance to a nation, that the public media takes. Consider the two tasks of mass-media, to entertain the public and to superintend the several people who may have too much prorogue, it has no choice but too focus on the privat life of public figures. After all, as the mass-media is now competent to these two jobs, winning the honor of uncrowned king, every aspects of the famous people’s life is certainly exposed too much to the public.
However, as sentiment sometimes varies according to the different qualifications given, some adverse notions may be justified. For example, a negation, resulted from the inconveniece that the public care has brought to the illuminates’ life, may be put forth. Or consider that the public figures are more and more aware of the attention they draws, the image that they send to us through television, newspapers or others are more possibly to be pretentous. Albeit all these suggestions seems reasonable to some extent, they only play a supplementary, if any, role, far from undermining my positive attitude.
In sum, as my contention performed above, while in theory public figures can enjoy their private life, I fundlementally agree that the public figure should have no complaints when they lose some of their privacy. |
|