It does not get easier with each breach of privacy against a particular celebrity. It hurts celebrities each and every time their privacy is violated. Julie Hilden further believes that celebrities do not owe the public anything and should not be forced to give up their right to privacy (1-4).
SECTION 3: SUMMARY OF THE PRIMARY "NO" ARTICLE.
An ordinary woman named Debbie from Queens, New York, wrote the opposing article, "Celebrities and Privacy Do Not Go Together- In this article Debbie explains why she feels that laws should not be established to protect celebrities from reporters and photographers. Debbie feels that when one takes on the "lifestyles of the rich and the famous", he or she must accept all of the good and bad aspects, such as having little to no privacy. Celebrities should know what they are getting themselves into before choosing to become famous. Debbie thinks that they should either accept the reality that they will never have any privacy or get out of the entertainment industry and away from the limelight. She feels that instead of griping about what they don't have, celebrities should be happy and content with what they do have, which is substantially more then most.
Lee 3.
Not everyone is fortunate enough to live in a mansion, have multiple cars, and a maid to clean up after them. Lack of privacy is the price they pay for their wealth, fame and the power that comes with it. Debbie feels very strongly that celebrities have no right to complain about the public's desire to know the details of their lives and that they deserve sympathy from no one. It is common people who pay money to go see their favorite celebrity in a movie or concert, which is where a large portion of the celebrity's income is attained. Celebrities are nothing without the common people; therefore the public has a right to know what goes on in their day-to-day lives. If a celebrity can't handle the loss of privacy then he or she should get out of the entertainment business (1-3).
