Details of politicians’ private lives should not be published in newspapers.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

It is being argued that media houses should not disclose the personal lives of statesmen. I completely agree with

this

statement because it will not only violate their right to

privacy

,

Remove the comma

apply

show examples

but

also

they should focus their resources on more pressing issues that need immediate attention

such

as poverty. It is the fundamental right of every human being to have their

privacy

. Even though they are public figures, their private lives should be away from the eyes of the media. They should only be judged against the service towards their countries and not for what is happening in their day-to-day affairs.

The

Correct article usage

A

show examples

prime example of

this

can be seen in the Constitution of the USA, which gives its citizens the right to

privacy

.

In addition

to

this

, it is the responsibility of newspapers to address important matters including poverty. Media can be a very powerful medium, so rather than talking about other people’s

life

Fix the agreement mistake

lives

show examples

, resources should be diverted towards putting pressure on public officials to engage them in solving real-life problems. Using their influence to the benefit of the general public should be the main focus of newspapers.

For example

, during the Great Depression, The Guardian was the main voice of people in protesting against the poor living conditions. In conclusion, I do not support the argument of newspapers publishing the personal information of government officials.

This

is because it will result in the violation of their

privacy

and

also

the primary focus of news agencies should be to highlight key issues concerning the nation.