Some argue that details of political figures’ lives should be published in newspapers, whereas others presume that this may be invasive of privacy. While this helps enhance transparency and public trust, I personally agree with the second group, as it may not only compromise politicians private lives but also result in irreparable consequences like mental health issues.
On one hand, broadcasting details of famous polticians’ lives can foster a sense of honesty and trust among people. When well-informed about the current affairs of their lives, individuals assueme that there may not be any hidden issues behind the scenes of politics, giving a sense of credibility. Additionally, providing enough details about them can considerably enhance the public trust in society. In Iran the life-style of political men has always been a secret among individuals. Since the press has never been allowed to disseminate private information about their lives, there is no sufficient information about their possossions, vehicles, and even children, which results in dishonesty and unreliability.
On the other hand, experiencing constant public scrutiny may not only infringe the privacy right but also lead to detrimental effects. Firstly, popular individuals may face private life problems. Be scrutinized constanly, they miss out on a normal life. To illustrate, they may deprived from simple activities such as walking, having a party, and going to recreational centers, influencing their family life. Secondly, pressure of fame may contribute to mental health issues. For example, political icons may opt to adopt an isolated lifestyle to prevent from overexposure, developing deppression and anxiety.
In conclusion, whether the private lives of political men should be broadcasted has always been a point of conention. While the upsides of honesty and reliability may have a ripple effect in society, in my opinion the downsides- family issues and mental illnesses- outweigh them.