It has been controversial issue whether authorities’ private lives should be pressed by media or it is not suitable in terms of privacy. From my point of view people have a right to access information about politics who make decisions for them, provided that it is limited.
To begin with, advocates of the first approach hold the view that nations had better to have an idea about personality of the president or prime minister, because they possess a power of management. To illustrate, during the elections folks are tend to vote for the candidates who they know and devote. Moreover, if these politicians have strong family relationships, it is believed that they will have good emotional bonds with the people as well. These cases tell a lot about their personal features which are extremely important for those believing them.
On the other hand, a group of people find it unethical to share news related to someone’s private life. Proponents of this idea claim that personal life do not affect professional decisions, therefore it is not logical to desire learn about people’s lives.
For example, if authorities are good at running governmental issues, the only news published in newspapers should be related to these successes or professional failures.
In conclusion, while a group of people oppose that it is necessary to have knowledge about politics’ way of life,others strongly opine that it is invasion of privacy. However, as far as I am concerned, there is no any problem to know authorities, but should be limited.