Chapter 1

THBT PUBLIC FIGURES HAVE NO RIGHT TO PRIVATE LIVES

By: Sarti Wahyuni, S.Pd

A. Motion Background

Public figures are people who have a certain social position, such as politicians, celebrities,

business leader, or social media personality in a certain scope and significantly influences the society.

They are often concerned widely by the public, and they can take benefit enormously from the society.

Furthermore, they are closely following the public interest in the society. Private lives means the social or

family life, and personal relationships of an individual, especially of a person in the public eyes, such as a

politician or celebrity. Therefore, the public figure’s private lives in the motion means that the personal

lives of the politicians.

The issue that media should publish the details of the private lives of public figures has been raise

from many years ago and create contoversial among the society until right now. It happened because the

media gives extensive coverage to the misdeeds of politicians or celebrities in order to protect the

politician or celebrities dignity. Therefore, their dignity is still maintained even if they did a bad

behaviour. However, it againts the media ethic code and the right of the society to know the politician

background.

B. Set Up of The Motion

This motion could be discussed in all countries where the media is still restricted to publish the

politicians’ private lives.

In the status quo, the media is still restricted to publish the politicians’ private lives. It happened

for two reasons; first, the media is owned by the politician, second, the media is under the government’s

control. The moment when media is owned by the politicians and the government’s control make the

media can not publish the private lives of the politicians. Ideally, the media is the platform for the society

to know every aspects of the nation, including the politicians’ private lives, in which not only their good

behaviour, but also their worsen attitude. Furthermore, the media is also the platform for the society to

critisize the politicians. But however, the media movement is restricted since it is under the politician and
government control. As the result, media only publish the good behaviour of the politicians and hide the

bad one. That is why, it creates the massive problem for the society even the most exclusively, it will be

impcatful for the nation.

The prolems appear because the media covered the politicians bakground to the society in terms of

the politicians’ bad behaviour . The bad behaviour here are drug dialer, murderer, thief, and comes from

the broken home family. There are two types of society; those who are rational and irrational. The society

who have rationality, they will think and try to find out the politicians background and they are not easy to

complacent with the utopic promises given by the politicians. However, society who are irrational do not

want to find out the politicians background and they are easy to complacent with the politician promises.

In this case, the writer believe that, even if the society who are ratioanal will think and try to find out the

politicians’ background, the tendency to do it is in a little possibility. The reasons are; first, the society do

not have much time to think and find out the politicians’ background since their economical condition.

The society who are under poverty line do not have time to find out even to think about the politicians’

background. How could they think about the politician meanwhile they are in suffer (hungry, sick,e.t.c) ?

therefore, they will focus on how to find a lot of money to support their live. Furthermore, for the society

who are rich, they are ignorance with the politicians background. The reasons are since they are not

interested with the political system and they are busy in the work place all the day to collect much more

money. Thus, the moment when media hide the bad behaviour of the politicians, the societycontiniously

think that the politicians are the good ones. The politicians’ bad behaviour is important to know by the

society. It is because as the politians, they are the leader in the country, it means that they have power to

do everything they want toward the nation. The moment when they have bad behaviour, there is a

possibility for them to repeat the action. It happens because the tendency of someone to repeat something

bad is because they have opportunity in doing it. Therefore, when a politician was a thief for example, he

will be a corruptor since there is an opportunity to do it. As the result, the politician will take beneficiary

of the nation, and the one who suffer of their action is the society. That is the problem in the current status

quo right now.

This debate should run under the discussion of; first, whether or not the politicians’ private lives

are the personal right of the politicians or it is the right of the society. Second, whether or not the

politicians’ private lives bring more harm than good toward the nation. The affirmative team must prove

that the politician private lives are the right of the society, and it brings more harm than good for the
nation. The opposition team have to prove that the politicians’ private lives are the personal right of the

politician, and it will not be impactful toward the country.

C. Arguments of Affirmative

1. Why the politicians’ private lives are the right of the society

Every individual has their personal right including the private lives, and it can not be disturb by

anyone. However, in some cases, the individual right can be taken by others for three reasons.

First, there is consent of the individual, second, the individual took something from others and it

profitable him, and the last is the individual’s action gives impact for other people. The

explanation of the three aspects is as follows:

a. There is consent of the individual

Consent means someone’s agreement to involve in a position or organization, and the

individual has accept any consequences that will be happen as long as he/she is whithin

that position. In this case, the politicians have already agreed to involve in the position as

the governmental body. It means that the politicians have already known every

consequence of their actions. As the individual who has power, they are becoming the

public attention. They become the role model for the society. Every action they do will take

the society’s attention whether it is good or bad behaviour. The moment when the

politicians did the good behaviour, then they will be appreciated by the society. However,

when they undergone the bad behaviour, they will be judged as the bad people by the

society.