Public Disclosure Of Private Information example essay topic

Public Office, Private Lives Where's the Line? John F. Kennedy's attitude towards marital fidelity was well known to the media but was never disclosed to the public. Even after ample public disclosure in the years following his assassination, the image of John F. Kennedy remains relatively untarnished. Thirty-five years later however, Bill Clinton's pale imitation of John Kennedy's personal lifestyle brought him impeachment by congress and almost cost him the presidency. It appears that the difference in the media's treatment of the two situations can be explained, in part, by the eagerness of the media to treat nothing as being sacred or private, whether or not it really constitutes serious news. Can one argue that one response was more appropriate than the other?

Further, should politicians be answerable for the events in their private lives? As a general rule, politicians should be answerable for those activities in their private lives that have a material bearing on their ability to discharge their responsibilities in office. Some examples may help to explain and further support this argument. In the cases of Kennedy and Clinton, did their marital infidelity really affect their abilities to carry out the responsibilities of the presidency? And does it appear that public support and confidence in these public figures diminished with the availability of this information? It appears not.

Indeed, in Kennedy's case, the public was unaware of his indiscretions and he enjoyed great public support and still, to this day, with the awareness he is viewed as a public hero. Therefore, there is no purpose served other than damaging and invading a person's privacy. A very current example of worthy media attention was the drunk driving incident involving the premier of British Columbia. All the extenuating circumstances related to the offense raised serious questions about his fitness for the premiership. Arguably, a direct connection can be made between a potentially life threatening poor judgment and the level of responsibility required by a premier. William Lyon Mackenzie King was the longest serving prime minister in Canadian history.

It was not until years after his death that biographers determined and disclosed his intense and consuming relationship with the spirit world. Apparently, Mackenzie King had regular contact with the spirits and with his deceased mother through the medium of a Ouija board and, in fact, important political decisions were often based on those encounters. If this information were available today about today's prime minister his days likely would long ago have been numbered. The eagerness of the media cannot be tamed. They will expose every bit of information they can get their hands on to feed the people.

This could be extremely detrimental because it may prevent potential talented public servants from participating in a high profile public sector due to their concerns around intrusion to their private lives. Perhaps to be considered would be a law designed to provide recourse for people in the public eye who are feeling harassed and exposed by the media simply for the purposes of public amusement or titillation. Hopefully, at the very least, this law would serve to inhibit and constrain media sources from indiscriminately exposing all aspects of the private lives of public figures. Public figures would have a right to sue for damages whenever there has been public disclosure of private information, which cannot be demonstrated to be relevant to their public office. Clearly this would be difficult because of the uncertainty of defining what is or is not material. But without this type of legislation, there are no restrictions or consequences for indiscrete exposure.

The media is already sensitive to the consequences of liable, therefore, it is not a stretch to impose an additional requirement of discretion.