It's a common dream I know most have had. It is the dream of becoming a celebrity. Many strive to become one of the rich, famous, and powerful. Never realizing all of the drawbacks to constantly being in the limelight. Not understanding that the cost of wealth and notoriety is the inevitable loss of privacy. However, many disagree on whether celebrities deserve privacy or if they owe the public intimate details of their private lives. I intend to debate the privacy issue of celebrities by contrasting two articles written by people with opposing views: "Does Celebrity Destroy Privacy?" by Julie Hilden and "Celebrities and Privacy Do Not Go Together- by an ordinary woman named Debbie from Queens, New York. I will then share my opinion on the issue after examining the validity of the opposing views.
SECTION 2: SUMMARY OF THE PRIMARY "YES" ARTICLE.
Julie Hilden, author of the article "Does Celebrity Destroy Privacy?" feels that just because a person is in the entertainment industry doesn't mean that they have chosen to give up all of their privacy. In her article Hilden discusses the Naomi Campbell lawsuit against the London tabloid newspaper The Mirror. She uses the lawsuit to reestablish her views on the privacy issue of celebrities. Hilden feels that if the calculated public image of a celebrity clashes with private reality then the media has a right to inquire the truth .
Lee 2.
Otherwise, Hilden feels it is unfair that a celebrity is expected to waive their rights to privacy. All celebrities are expected to lose some aspects of their private life but they should be able to retain others. A celebrity can choose, to a certain extent the degree of privacy he or she maintains. For example, when asked a private question in an interview, a celebrity can choose to reply with the privacy protecting "no comment" instead of giving an answer. Hilden believes that it is up to the celebrity to draw the line on how far they will allow the press to go.