Do public figures have a right to keep their private lives just that---PRIVATE

[ets2361]

I know this is a sports example but it happens to athletes, celebrities and other public figures. Do people who make their living in the public spotlight have the right to have their personal lives kept that just private and personal or is it OK to ask them or in other cases stalk them to publish their personal and private events of their life.

I believe that they should be entitled to a personal life out of the limelight and that we as the public should have enough class to leave them alone. Of course the other side of the fence is when they do things in pubic that put them in the bad limelight such as the recent Tiger Woods issue and many others.

I only bring this up as I was reading the following article re David Price of the Boston Red Sox taking a stand and no longer answering questions of a personal nature to the press

http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/price-boston-media-no-asking-questions-personal-level/

 

[fuji]

I know this is a sports example but it happens to athletes, celebrities and other public figures. Do people who make their living in the public spotlight have the right to have their personal lives kept that just private and personal or is it OK to ask them or in other cases stalk them to publish their personal and private events of their life.

I believe that they should be entitled to a personal life out of the limelight and that we as the public should have enough class to leave them alone. Of course the other side of the fence is when they do things in pubic that put them in the bad limelight such as the recent Tiger Woods issue and many others.

I only bring this up as I was reading the following article re David Price of the Boston Red Sox taking a stand and no longer answering questions of a personal nature to the press

http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/price-boston-media-no-asking-questions-personal-level/

Celebrities and sports stars yes.

Politicians no.

 

[bazokajoe]

I say yes and no.

Any public figure weather it be in sports,TV/movie personalities or politicians have the right to a private life. I know if I was a famous person I won't want cameras in my face eveywhere I go.People hassling me for autographs when away from "work".People wonder why public figures get defensive sometimes. Shit,they can't even go to dinner and a show without getting bothered.

Now,in the case of politicians,anytime business deals are done these should be made public so there is proof of no conflict of interest.

 

[Aardvark154]

They should.

Whether they do depends upon where they are. In Canada, the U.K. and France pretty much they do.

However, in the United States this is covered by New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). I'm quite sure that Justice Brennan who wrote the opinion is spinning in his grave as to what it has developed into. Many in the U.S. legal community feel it was an overreach and is long overdue to be reconsidered, or at the very least narrowed.

 

[fuji]

I say yes and no.

Any public figure weather it be in sports,TV/movie personalities or politicians have the right to a private life. I know if I was a famous person I won't want cameras in my face eveywhere I go.People hassling me for autographs when away from "work".People wonder why public figures get defensive sometimes. Shit,they can't even go to dinner and a show without getting bothered.

Now,in the case of politicians,anytime business deals are done these should be made public so there is proof of no conflict of interest.

Politicians running for election are applying for a job with the public making the hiring decision. We need to know enough about who they really are to make that decision and who they are will extend considerably into their private life. I think pretty much anything about them is fair game, but their families should be left out of it.

 

[Occasionally]

For me, I think EVERYONE deserves privacy for home life. Just because someone is famous doesn't mean people should have free reign to snoop around or do stupid things.

Comedians and cartoonists can crack jokes, draw pictures and do absurd skits on many public people. And most of the jokes are based on private life. Yeah, the person might be rich and famous, and might not even care, but some do.

If the guy who does the Toronto Sun daily cartoon made one about you..... and he drew you as a fat ugly slob, I don't think many of you would like it either. Even if you know in your heart you aren't attractive, and that his pic is truthful in a certain way, you still wouldn't want someone having the green light to make fun.

Or let's say he drew you sitting on the couch drinking like a drunk. Doesn't sound right to me even if you are someone who drinks a lot.

 

[Aardvark154]

Politicians running for election are applying for a job with the public making the hiring decision. We need to know enough about who they really are to make that decision and who they are will extend considerably into their private life. I think pretty much anything about them is fair game, but their families should be left out of it.

Then never, ever post in the future about any politician's non-criminal moral or relationship failures.

For that is what such articles are about 99 percent of the time. Not that politician A was arrested for robbing a bank, or that candidate B was convicted of embezzling $500,000 two years ago, or that candidate C has been convicted of sexually molesting a six year old. No, no, no it is that politician X has been having an affair, candidate Y is a member of TERB and has seen SPs. Politician Z is into BDSM.

Please don't expect us to believe that what we are being told is probative, instead of merely salacious.

 

[oldjones]

Yes, they have a right to the same privacy all us less-interesting people enjoy without having to give it a thought. Does that mean their right will be respected when someone can make money, or gratify their urges or 'serve a higher purpose' by invading their privacy? No.

Which is why we need, and make laws (always after the damage is done) and should stop feeding the vulture that provide us with those peeks that are none of our business.

 

[oldjones]

Politicians running for election are applying for a job with the public making the hiring decision. We need to know enough about who they really are to make that decision and who they are will extend considerably into their private life. I think pretty much anything about them is fair game, but their families should be left out of it.

The principle: Know your Pols is a good one. Trouble is, as a political policy that more or less requires every candidate be investigated as a standard procedure, not just by the partys who tend to be a tad biased, and do a piss-poor job at the best of times, but by … , oh yeah, the FBI. Or the local equivalent

And I'd rather live with a system that has the President crowing about avoiding investigation, than one that treats the Head of Government like a dubious school-crossing guard. If they/we're so untrusting we can't vote until theyre investigated we're unworthy of being a democracy.

Which is why the press should be free to be as alt, fake, muckraking, tabloid as it needs to be to survive. And we just have to hope the mainstream of readers/viewers puts their loonies towards the ones that speak true. It's mostly worked sorta well so far.

 

[kherg007]

People should be entitled to private lives. Full stop. Private lives become relevant for public officials if it affects their public life. A politician has an affair - that's his business. A politician has an affair and his paramour owns a company that just got a government contract - then it is the public's business. Same with athletes. If they choose to share, then its their business. If they choose not to share, that should be their business. I have been stunned by the diff's in Australia v. USA as far as how politicians private lives are treated. They're left alone in Oz...one night in a restaurant the next table had the Premiere dining with his wife - no entourage, everybody leaving them alone. The US equivalent - a Governor - walks into a restaurant with half a dozen folks, assistants, security team....eeks.

 

[The Options Menu]

Do people who make their living in the public spotlight have the right to have their personal lives kept that just private and personal or is it OK to ask them or in other cases stalk them to publish their personal and private events of their life.

I think everybody should be entitled to a private life insofar as they don't make other people's private lives a central part of their public lives and then engage in blatant hypocrisy.

 

[frankcastle]

ideally yes.

but in reality it wont happen.

as a public figure you should be aware of this and act accordingly. if you dont think you can get out of public view.

i mean want to make millions golfing or be the golf pro at a club and get hammered.

 

[fuji]

Then never, ever post in the future about any politician's non-criminal moral or relationship failures.

For that is what such articles are about 99 percent of the time. Not that politician A was arrested for robbing a bank, or that candidate B was convicted of embezzling $500,000 two years ago, or that candidate C has been convicted of sexually molesting a six year old. No, no, no it is that politician X has been having an affair, candidate Y is a member of TERB and has seen SPs. Politician Z is into BDSM.

Please don't expect us to believe that what we are being told is probative, instead of merely salacious.

Reread my post. I'm saying exactly that those things are fair game.

 

[The Options Menu]

as a public figure you should be aware of this and act accordingly. if you dont think you can get out of public view.

In the Canadian context this hasn't generally been true. In our political class, their private lives are generally off limits unless there is an issue of blatant hypocrisy, or something that goes to their capacity to perform their job. This has been for good and for ill, as it has caused some really gross things to get swept under the rug over the years (Parliamentary Pages being abused comes to mind). Even most celebrities / musicians / athletes who aren't playing the 'celebrity news game' are pretty much left alone here. In the US their politicians are under intensive personal scrutiny, but most of their celebrities / musicians / athletes who don't play the game get left mostly alone(ish). In the UK, all bets are off...

 

[frankcastle]

In the Canadian context this hasn't generally been true. In our political class, their private lives are generally off limits unless there is an issue of blatant hypocrisy, or something that goes to their capacity to perform their job. This has been for good and for ill, as it has caused some really gross things to get swept under the rug over the years (Parliamentary Pages being abused comes to mind). Even most celebrities / musicians / athletes who aren't playing the 'celebrity news game' are pretty much left alone here. In the US their politicians are under intensive personal scrutiny, but most of their celebrities / musicians / athletes who don't play the game get left mostly alone(ish). In the UK, all bets are off...

if a politician abused pages or i abused my secretary we both should face consequences

 

[GPIDEAL]

Celebrities and sports stars yes.

Politicians no.

I would tend to agree with you here, although politicians still need personal space and private time, although their personal opinions can't be private (I read an excellent article that personal views of a political leader are relevant meaning they might not be completely regarded as neutral on certain controversial topics).

 

[The Options Menu]

if a politician abused pages or i abused my secretary we both should face consequences

Oh, I agree. Though plenty of abuse has happened over the years by just about every account.

So let me amend my, "I think everybody should be entitled to a private life insofar as they don't make other people's private lives a central part of their public lives and then engage in blatant hypocrisy." to, "I think everybody should be entitled to a private life insofar as they don't make other people's private lives a central part of their public lives and then engage in blatant hypocrisy, with exceptions for anything that would be more than a summary offence if convicted, or anything that involves their ability to execute their job."

Just to balance the right to privacy vs public figures being shitty.

 

[barnacler]

I want my politician to be the best at the job he is running for, I couldn't care less whether he or she is a nice person etc or anything about the private life

 

[GPIDEAL]

I want my politician to be the best at the job he is running for, I couldn't care less whether he or she is a nice person etc or anything about the private life

Generally, I would agree with you (I think JFK was a good President, even though he was a philanderer of the highest order as one Secret Service Agent put it, but maybe one can blame his cortisone shots for his Addison's disease).

However:

If he beat his wife in his private life, that would be relevant.

Likewise, his personal views on abortion might be relevant too, because he is a public servant.

 

[managee]

Yes, they have a right to the same privacy all us less-interesting people enjoy without having to give it a thought. Does that mean their right will be respected when someone can make money, or gratify their urges or 'serve a higher purpose' by invading their privacy? No.

Which is why we need, and make laws (always after the damage is done) and should stop feeding the vulture that provide us with those peeks that are none of our business.

I'm with you here, oldjones.

My take is that as long as basic expectations for privacy aren't being violated (and I'm not entirely sure what laws exist here), anyone is fair game for non-libellous press coverage. Celebrities, sports or otherwise, shouldn't (and generally don't) expect to derive an income from public spectacle, then have the ability to hang up their skates (etc.) and fade into the mysts of public obscurity.

Especially in an era where everyone with a phone can be paparazzi if they're in the right place at the right time.

The knife cuts both ways for celebrities.