I agree with the view expressed by this writer:. He has argued his point very well.
http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC120210-0000033/Drawing-the-line-on-public-accountability
http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC120210-0000033/Drawing-the-line-on-public-accountability
It is important to define what is meant by "private lives". In cases where people have jobs with normal working hours, the boundaries are usually clear between their private lives and their work. The bus driver becomes an employee when he starts his working day and reverts to being a private individual when he finishes work. He can be as rude, unhelpful and abusive as a he wants in private, but is expected to be polite and helpful when on duty.
ReplyDeleteThe distinction between private and public lives becomes less clear when people carry on part of their professional life outside of normal working hours.
The distinction almost ceases to exist in cases where an individual's work or professional life depends entirely on them presenting their total selves to the public. Politicians are the best examples. People elect politicians to office for who they are, not just for their skills in a particular job.
Private morality can tell us something about the person's character, and how it could affect their professional performance. If, in his private life, a public figure is found to have lied in a serious way, the public should be made aware that he could be lying in his work, too. Where public figures are responsible for setting a moral tone in society, any private immorality should be exposed as hypocrisy. For example, society should be aware that a leading campaigner against child abuse regularly beats his own children.