Politicians’ private lives should not be published in newspapers. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Nowadays, newspapers are possibly the most popular source of information around the world. It is known that politicians have to appear in public to show their work.

However

, some papers may want to keep unpublished their personal life. I completely agree because sharing intimate details may cause that readers lose their focus. On the one hand, political workers are not artists.

Therefore

, it is not crucial to know about their lives after work.

For example

, it is not important to read about hobbies, food decisions and, their children names.

Also

, they are using inhabitants money to make improvements

such

as building more schools and hospitals. Reading

this

is helpful to increase people's trust in governments.

In addition

, some public employees are being used as an example to some teenagers.

Then

, showing their professional labour is crucial.

On the other hand

, sharing private data about politics could disperse people's attention.

For instance

, the public would be more interested in reading about personal problems, clothing brands and, family vacations rather than paying attention to social-economic problems. So, some dishonest public employees would take advantage of it.

For instance

, spending taxes on birthday's gifts could not be seen if individuals are focused on nonimportant details.

Moreover

, separating labour hours from leisure time is the responsibility of each person while working in

this

kind of work. To conclude, continuing in the same line of publishing only professional data is the correct decision. Respected newspapers should never share anything personal information about politicians' lives after labour hours.