Hoping of receiving some devoted comments to make my essay become convinced. Thank you for concerning.
Nowadays, a lot of media, including newspapers, magazines, televisions, radio, and even the Internet, are publishing stories of people private lives. Should this practice be banned?
The infringement of human rights has raised controversial disputes in the world, and one of them is the actuality of people's private rights. The media's tendency to reveal an individual's life in newspapers, magazines, televisions, radio and the Internet have kindled people's objections to being badly influenced. In my opinion, this trend needs banning by both personal and legal reasons.
Firstly, if the private lives or even sensitive facts of journalists, celebrities or speakers who rashly proclaim others' secret be peered into, what will they feel? Evidently, everyone has their own private stories which are forbidden to others' intervention. These affect their emotions, psychologies, failure, weakness and even life orientations. As a result, they can easily lose their temper and act uncontrollably, even suddenly destroy themselves because of fear and outside preconceptions. In perpetrators' view, it can not be speculative that these unlegalized behaviors help people gain popularity in public because their impulses are not rooted from positive intention but satisfy themselves upon others' important issues. Moreover, they concern much about view ration instead of the accuracy of information transmitted and victims' acquiescence. In any interactive relationship, if the consensus is ignored and the inevitable consequences are not directly pointed out, it is immoral for people's private information to be exposed.
Secondly, in the legal view, it is completely undue to publicize people's information of their own lives regardless of any warrant. Everyone merit private rights in whatever form like letters, personal information, the current state of relationships and political concepts or views,... which are ruled in any constitution. "Private lives" is a phrase manifesting about sensitive stories of people, which shouldn't be approached without their permission, so the revealed posts in the media justify the violation of the law. Based on this, the executive bodies must be compelled to control severely this tumultuous state and secure their citizens' security as well as quell the blackmail and other unwished circumstances.
In conclusion, any practice consistently linking with peoples' private rights need being legally bound and compactly consult with people of that information. If the rules cannot be complied, a stern ban must be put.
Nowadays, a lot of media, including newspapers, magazines, televisions, radio, and even the Internet, are publishing stories of people private lives. Should this practice be banned?
people's private rights and media
The infringement of human rights has raised controversial disputes in the world, and one of them is the actuality of people's private rights. The media's tendency to reveal an individual's life in newspapers, magazines, televisions, radio and the Internet have kindled people's objections to being badly influenced. In my opinion, this trend needs banning by both personal and legal reasons.
Firstly, if the private lives or even sensitive facts of journalists, celebrities or speakers who rashly proclaim others' secret be peered into, what will they feel? Evidently, everyone has their own private stories which are forbidden to others' intervention. These affect their emotions, psychologies, failure, weakness and even life orientations. As a result, they can easily lose their temper and act uncontrollably, even suddenly destroy themselves because of fear and outside preconceptions. In perpetrators' view, it can not be speculative that these unlegalized behaviors help people gain popularity in public because their impulses are not rooted from positive intention but satisfy themselves upon others' important issues. Moreover, they concern much about view ration instead of the accuracy of information transmitted and victims' acquiescence. In any interactive relationship, if the consensus is ignored and the inevitable consequences are not directly pointed out, it is immoral for people's private information to be exposed.
Secondly, in the legal view, it is completely undue to publicize people's information of their own lives regardless of any warrant. Everyone merit private rights in whatever form like letters, personal information, the current state of relationships and political concepts or views,... which are ruled in any constitution. "Private lives" is a phrase manifesting about sensitive stories of people, which shouldn't be approached without their permission, so the revealed posts in the media justify the violation of the law. Based on this, the executive bodies must be compelled to control severely this tumultuous state and secure their citizens' security as well as quell the blackmail and other unwished circumstances.
In conclusion, any practice consistently linking with peoples' private rights need being legally bound and compactly consult with people of that information. If the rules cannot be complied, a stern ban must be put.
