IGCSE argumentative essay | 2007 Oct-Nov | 'If you make your living by being a public figure



Question

You are advised to write between 350 and 500 words on the following topic:

‘If you make your living by being a public figure such as a film star or musician, then you are public property and cannot expect privacy.’ Do you agree?

Model Essay

The notion that public figures such as film stars or musicians are “public property” and therefore cannot expect privacy is a contentious issue. While it is true that choosing a career in the public eye comes with certain expectations and responsibilities, it is crucial to recognize that public figures are still entitled to their fundamental right to privacy. I do not agree with the statement that being a public figure equates to forfeiting one’s right to privacy, and here’s why.

Public figures, by the nature of their work, live under the scrutiny of the public and media. They often rely on public attention to build their careers, attract audiences, and maintain relevance in their fields. For example, actors, musicians, and athletes engage with fans through interviews, social media, and public appearances, creating a connection that is beneficial to their careers. This visibility, however, does not mean they should be stripped of their privacy rights.

Everyone, regardless of their profession, has an inherent right to privacy. This right is protected under various international human rights laws, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which asserts that “no one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home, or correspondence.” Public figures are no exception to this rule. They should be able to enjoy personal moments, maintain private relationships, and live without constant surveillance and intrusion.

Invasion of privacy can have severe consequences on public figures’ mental health and well-being. Constant media attention and public scrutiny can lead to stress, anxiety, and depression. There are numerous instances where relentless paparazzi and invasive reporting have caused significant distress to celebrities. The tragic death of Princess Diana, for example, highlighted the dangers of excessive media intrusion. Such incidents underscore the need to balance public interest with respect for individual privacy.

ADVERTISEMENT



While the media plays a crucial role in providing information and entertainment, there is a fine line between reporting news and violating privacy. Ethical journalism should respect the boundaries of public figures’ private lives unless there is a compelling public interest. Sensationalizing personal issues for commercial gain is not only unethical but also harmful. Responsible media practices should prioritize the dignity and rights of individuals over profit.

Some may argue that public figures, by seeking fame and fortune, implicitly accept the loss of privacy as part of the deal. However, this argument overlooks the distinction between professional and personal life. Just because someone is famous does not mean every aspect of their life should be open to public scrutiny. Furthermore, expecting celebrities to forgo privacy entirely is unrealistic and unfair. They should be allowed to enjoy their personal lives just like anyone else.

In conclusion, while public figures indeed occupy a unique position in society that involves a certain level of public interaction, this does not justify the complete erosion of their privacy rights. They are entitled to personal space and the right to live without constant intrusion. It is essential for society, including the media and the public, to respect the privacy of celebrities and balance the interest in their professional lives with respect for their personal boundaries. Ethical considerations and respect for individual rights should guide our interactions with public figures, ensuring that their humanity is acknowledged and preserved.

Word Count: 539