Tuesday April 24, 2018
Home Opinion Private lives...

Private lives of public figures are wide open to public scrutiny, says Rodrigues

Can they be ethical in public if they are unethical in private?

2
//
262
Ethics, Virtue and Character. Pixabay
Republish
Reprint

Recently Aam Aadmi Party spokesperson Ashutosh jumped in to the defense of Delhi government Women and Child and Social Welfare Minister Sandeep Kumar on the issue of sex CD. He termed the whole saga of sexual liaison of Sandeep Kumar as a private affair between two consenting parties.

Next day, the victim lodged a police complaint against the Minister of rape. Naturally, this put Ashutosh in an awkward position. Demand for his sacking and termination from Aam Aadmi Party is gaining ground. AAP’s MLA from Bijwasan assembly seat, Colonel Devdinder Sehrawat also criticized Ashutosh’s utterances and said that they were against party’s value system.

Advocate Aires Rodrigues from Goa has penned down his take on the matter of privacy of a public figure. Mr Rodrigues says:

aires
Mr. Aires Rodrigues

Persons in Public life are expected to be moral exemplars of morality and ethics as they have pledged to uphold and defend that realm. There is no dividing line between their personal and public life. Private lives of public figures are wide open to public scrutiny. What they do in their private life matters and does impact their public responsibilitiesCan they be ethical in public if they are unethical in private? Their private life reveals more about morals than their sound bites.

That British MP Keith Vaz has now been caught in a very scandalizing sex scandal only exposes the sagging moral values of those in public life. Less said the better on the numerous Aam Aadmi Party Ministers and MLAs in Delhi caught in similar disgraceful acts.

Ashutosh, Aam Aadmi Party. Wikimedia Commons
Ashutosh, Aam Aadmi Party. Wikimedia Commons

Manohar Parrikar and Atmaram Nadkarni were also once spotted at the red light area at Pattaya in Bangkok. Manohar Parrikar had publicly defended his visit by claiming that it was not to have sex but that he merely enjoyed two Thai massages. “Do I have to go so far for sex” is what Manohar Parrikar had quipped.

The French Nobel Prize winning Author and Philosopher Albert Camus had rightly said: “A man without ethics is a wild beast loosed upon this world”. We cannot afford to have wolves in sheep’s clothing!

Advocate Rodrigues lives in Goa, India. Twitter @rodrigues_aires

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 NewsGram

  • Kabir Chaudhary

    Yes, it is true that private lives of public figures are always open to public scrutiny but it is also important that each of us as an individual should respect their privacy and not scrutinise them every time.

    • Dr. Ferdinando

      Or is it that ones with ROT within them should not venture into public life? After all, Indians do follow the public figure.

  • Kabir Chaudhary

    Yes, it is true that private lives of public figures are always open to public scrutiny but it is also important that each of us as an individual should respect their privacy and not scrutinise them every time.

    • Dr. Ferdinando

      Or is it that ones with ROT within them should not venture into public life? After all, Indians do follow the public figure.

Next Story

Just in! No More Blue Tick to Verify your Account on Twitter

The announcement came after people criticised Twitter for verifying the account belonging to the organiser of the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, that left one dead in August

0
//
23
blue tick
Twitter app on a mobile phone. Pixabay

San Francisco, November 10, 2017 : Twitter has suspended its account verification exercise – a process that gives public figures on the micro-blogging platform a blue tick mark next to their names.

The announcement came after people criticised Twitter for verifying the account belonging to the organiser of the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, that left one dead in August, TechCrunch reported on Friday.

“Verification was meant to authenticate identity and voice but it is interpreted as an endorsement or an indicator of importance.

“We recognise that we have created this confusion and need to resolve it. We have paused all general verifications while we work and will report back soon,” read a tweet from @TwitterSupport account.

Jason Kessler, the organiser of the supremacist rally, was given the preferred status indicated by the blue tick.

Twitter had earlier withheld blue tick mark for whistleblower Julian Assange.

“We should’ve communicated faster on this: our agents have been following our verification policy correctly, but we realised some time ago the system is broken and needs to be reconsidered.

“And we failed by not doing anything about it. Working now to fix faster,” tweeted CEO Jack Dorsey.

Launched in 2016, the micro-blogging website created an online application process for Twitter accounts to receive verified status, which allows people to identify key individuals and organisations on Twitter as authentic and are denoted by a blue tick icon.

This typically includes accounts maintained by public figures and organisations in music, TV, film, fashion, government, politics, religion, media, sports, business and other key interest areas. (IANS)