The media should OR should not be restricted from publishing information which intrudes upon the privacy of individuals.

Insert Name Insert Institution Insert Grade Course Insert Tutor`s Name 18 October, 2011 The media should be restricted from prying into private lives albeit with exceptions The term ‘privacy` has been interpreted differently in various disciplines depending on context. Similarly, this term though simple has attracted a lot of controversies in philosophy, legal and media studies as scholars fail to agree about what constitutes private and public issue/property. The debate, however, has been heightened in the realm of media due the fact that journalists from time to time have overstepped individual`s privacy in the name of informing the public. Apparently, this violation of privacy has been prevalent in the history of journalism and the numerous cases in courts is enough evidence that the media is sometimes guilty of taking intrusion of privacy a bit too far. Against this background, several laws have been designed with an aim of protecting members of the public from journalism greed. However, the laws have also attracted a lot of controversies due to the thin line between public/private issues. Needless to say, the main concern should not be about how much to restrict but not on whether to restrict because the answer is obvious, some form of restriction is necessary. This essay will explore this ethical dilemma in an attempt to shed light on the different propositions behind this controversial issue. While the issue of what constitutes private life may seem obvious, it is not always clear-cut when the individuals involved are public figures. In such instances, media houses have been at pain to establish how far they can probe into these individuals` lives in the name of informing the public. Apparently, when an individual`s work compels him/her to be answerable to the public, then the right to privacy becomes exceedingly complicated. On this note, if the conduct of such an individual yields any consequences on matters affecting the public, the media at that time should not be restricted from publishing this information by virtue that it is for the good of the public to know. For instance, if a politician has an affair with the office cleaner without jeopardizing his role as a public servant, then the media has no business publishing such information. However, if journalists discovered that during the affair the named politician happened to leak government secrets, the media should be set free to inform the public about this gross misconduct. On the other hand, it is imperative to exemplify that even though public servants are answerable to the public, their activities beyond the public limelight should be bestowed the privacy it deserves. ...