I think that all people should be able to protect their personal privacy. the media should just cover like their movies or crimes but other than that if they went shopping who cares. the media could be regulated by suing them if the cover the wrong stuff. Well we have already had people break down from the media not being regulated so we need to regulate the media. don't get me wrong though public access helps people know more about the bad things like crimes and bills and stuff like that. So in a way the media can do good and bad.
1.2.josh Yes I think they should be able to protect there identity. There personal life should be off limits unless they say you can. I think the secerity gaurds should regulate it. Ya I think they would be mad because that is there job is to get info on the stars. In conclusion I think the press needs to watch wat they put on air.
period 1 computer 4 I think that people should all have privacy if they are famous or infamous. The reason i think people should have privacy is because everyone has their own life and the whole world doesn't need to know about what goes on in their life.
2/3/10 per.1 laptop 13 Famous and infamous people should have their own privacy. the media should be allowed to show the bright and good informational things to the world, and not the bad or un-wanted info. the media should be restricted to the minumum of disterbence of people. it would not effect freedom of speach because its about others lifes. it provides little goodness but not much.
#11:per1- Everyone has a right to privacy. Famous and in famous people all deserve personal privacy. They should be able to show to the world big things. No one cares about who is dating who. If there is something big, for example a death, a new movie, or a new book, those are things that the media should show. The stars personal lives should be off limits for the media to get involved in. The managers of the media should enforce strict regulations. The regulations might start to infringe on the right of free speech and freedom of the press, but invading people's personal life isn't right. If the media isn't regulated stars and infamous people will get annoyed. Sometimes the public access is good, but we don't need to know everything. In conclusion the media needs to have rules and regulations on what they can publish.
1.2.josh I agree with you nember 14 because they have there own life. We dont have people in our lives taking pictures of us. They should live just like we do.
Famous people should be able to protect there personal life. The media should only be allowed to show stuff if its okay with the person or if its nothing embarrassing or bad about them. There is freedom of speech and freedom of press but that should be changed a little. I am pretty sure that they wouldn't like it if someone went around saying stories that are probably not true about them. Im not sure what would happen if the media wasn't regulated.I guess public access could be good sometimes because they can get paid for it and it could be good for all of us to, it could get us their opinion on stuff or some advise. In conclusion, I think famous people should keep there private life private.
1.26 I think that famous or infamous people should be able to keep their personal privacy.I think the media can show their past records but not their personal lives such as relationships or where they live. I think the media can be regulated by the police being able to arrest people trying to go to the off limits parts.I think the the media should not infringe upon the freedom of speech or press i think they should cancel each other out. I think that the media would all throw a riot and overthrow the famous people. I think public access serves good to the public because they can see what they have done in the past.
Yes, famous/infamous people should be able to retain personal privacy. But sadly they can't. Once you are immersed into the surreptitious media, there's no way to remain anonymous. I wouldn't suppose that the media can obtain bad reasons for their actions, they can think of countless ways to justify their cameras. All in all, my opinion is that, Media = Bad, Privacy = Good. No doubt about it.
Famous and infamous people should be able to protect their personal privacy. The media should only be able to show or share with the world what the famous and infamous people say is okay share. The media should not have to be regulated and should just leave people alone. I still think that every one should have freedom of speech but people shouldn't stoop to that low of a level to gossip about people's personal lives. I think that public access to the lives of famous and infamous people does serve a good purpose but still is not fair to the infamous or famous person who is being gossiped about.
I think the media is stupid. All they do is follow you around and they wont leave you alone. You cant go out with your kids or even go to the restroom without people making a big deal about it.
I believe that the media should be able to show the world what's going on with celebrities, and even infamous people. It does, however, infringe upon the rights of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. I think this is alright for the media to do because we the people deserve to know what is going on in the world. Also, we need to know whether or not we are going to be in danger. Overall I believe that public access to the lives of famous and infamous people serve a good purpose.
27 I have no idea what to write. I cant possibly imegane having the constant servalince. But i think that it is not good and the kid deservs some peace.
1. - I think that people who are either famous or infamous should be able to protect their personal privacy. The media should only show what the famous persons wants the media to show the world. Even though the media likes to get into other peoples business. They must put themselves the famous persons shoes, and respect one another personal life.
09 I think that famous or infamous people should be able to protect their personal privacy. The media should only be able to talk about like their movies and things like that not their personal life. I don't know how it could be regulated maybe they could sue the media Im not sure. I don't think it serves any good purpose. In conclusion, famous or infamous people should be able to protect their personal life.
I think that the media today is a serious problem, they should have like some board of people that look through the magazines and tabloids before they are published, and they are getting way out of control famous and infamous people cant even go outside without being photographed. Look at what happened to Princess Diana! And Michael Jackson got turned into a weirdo because he just wanted to be accepted in society. Many many people are put away in prison for crimes they didn't commit and people are free for ones that they did do. And i think that its because the media manipulates and convinces us of what they want to be the truth. All in all, i believe that the media isn't a good thing and people need to notice that we are ruining famous and infamous peoples lives.
Famous or infamous people should be able to protect their personal privacy. The media should be aloud to show certain things like when they have kids, but stay out of their sex life. The media could be regulated by they should be monitored by police. Well no because some of the stuff the media does is against their freedom of speech. This is like this because they are probably hurting the persons feelings. If the media isn't regulated then it would be bad because then maybe they could still hurt those peoples feelings. In conclusion public access can serve a good purpose every once in a while.
I think that all people should be able to protect their personal privacy. the media should only publish what the famous people or infamous people want them to
period 1.#19. I think that famous or infamous people should be able to protect their personal privacy. The media should be allowed to show some things like what the person wants for people to see and they shouldn't be allowed to show the things that are really none of anybody's buisness. The media could be regulated by thinking to theirself if that is what they want to happen to them. Yes i think that regulation does infringe upon the rights of free speech and freedom of the press because they would have to stop producing lots of information. If the media isn't regulated then it would be the same as it is today. Public access to the lives of the famous/infamous might serve a good purpose because then we can keep track of the criminals of the world. All in all, it depends on the person.
1,8 I think that the media should back off and not monitor everything other people do. All people should have their privacy. I don't think the media should show or take any pictures without the people's consent. I also think that the media should not be allowed to put out any stories that are not true. Some one really needs to do something to the media because one of these days they will go too far. It might say freedom of press, but we also need our privacy. I just think that the media doesn't have a right to do anything they want with the people and not suffer anything for it.
I think that anybody in the world no matter who it is, they should still be able to have privacy. The media should be able to monitor things that happen in public, but they should not be able to go on private property. The media could be regulated with cops keeping them away. No because the media doesnt have the right to go on someones property. Someone could end up shooting a media person for being on there property. Yes it would be nice to know whats going on in there lives but you dont always get what you want.
34 comments:
#14. period 1
I think that all people should be able to protect their personal privacy. the media should just cover like their movies or crimes but other than that if they went shopping who cares. the media could be regulated by suing them if the cover the wrong stuff. Well we have already had people break down from the media not being regulated so we need to regulate the media. don't get me wrong though public access helps people know more about the bad things like crimes and bills and stuff like that. So in a way the media can do good and bad.
1.2.josh
Yes I think they should be able to protect there identity. There personal life should be off limits unless they say you can. I think the secerity gaurds should regulate it. Ya I think they would be mad because that is there job is to get info on the stars. In conclusion I think the press needs to watch wat they put on air.
period 1
computer 4
I think that people should all have privacy if they are famous or infamous. The reason i think people should have privacy is because everyone has their own life and the whole world doesn't need to know about what goes on in their life.
2/3/10 per.1
laptop 13
Famous and infamous people should have their own privacy. the media should be allowed to show the bright and good informational things to the world, and not the bad or un-wanted info. the media should be restricted to the minumum of disterbence of people. it would not effect freedom of speach because its about others lifes. it provides little goodness but not much.
#11:per1-
Everyone has a right to privacy. Famous and in famous people all deserve personal privacy. They should be able to show to the world big things. No one cares about who is dating who. If there is something big, for example a death, a new movie, or a new book, those are things that the media should show. The stars personal lives should be off limits for the media to get involved in. The managers of the media should enforce strict regulations. The regulations might start to infringe on the right of free speech and freedom of the press, but invading people's personal life isn't right. If the media isn't regulated stars and infamous people will get annoyed. Sometimes the public access is good, but we don't need to know everything. In conclusion the media needs to have rules and regulations on what they can publish.
per.1 laptop 13
i agree with 14 because they need privacy unless needed to be reported.
1.2.josh
I agree with you nember 14 because they have there own life. We dont have people in our lives taking pictures of us. They should live just like we do.
period 1 #14
I agree with # 11 we really don't need to know everything.
period 1. computer 5
Famous people should be able to protect there personal life. The media should only be allowed to show stuff if its okay with the person or if its nothing embarrassing or bad about them. There is freedom of speech and freedom of press but that should be changed a little. I am pretty sure that they wouldn't like it if someone went around saying stories that are probably not true about them. Im not sure what would happen if the media wasn't regulated.I guess public access could be good sometimes because they can get paid for it and it could be good for all of us to, it could get us their opinion on stuff or some advise. In conclusion, I think famous people should keep there private life private.
1.26 I think that famous or infamous people should be able to keep their personal privacy.I think the media can show their past records but not their personal lives such as relationships or where they live. I think the media can be regulated by the police being able to arrest people trying to go to the off limits parts.I think the the media should not infringe upon the freedom of speech or press i think they should cancel each other out. I think that the media would all throw a riot and overthrow the famous people. I think public access serves good to the public because they can see what they have done in the past.
P1.#25
Yes, famous/infamous people should be able to retain personal privacy. But sadly they can't. Once you are immersed into the surreptitious media, there's no way to remain anonymous. I wouldn't suppose that the media can obtain bad reasons for their actions, they can think of countless ways to justify their cameras. All in all, my opinion is that, Media = Bad, Privacy = Good. No doubt about it.
period 1 computer 20
Famous and infamous people should be able to protect their personal privacy. The media should only be able to show or share with the world what the famous and infamous people say is okay share. The media should not have to be regulated and should just leave people alone. I still think that every one should have freedom of speech but people shouldn't stoop to that low of a level to gossip about people's personal lives. I think that public access to the lives of famous and infamous people does serve a good purpose but still is not fair to the infamous or famous person who is being gossiped about.
#24 period 1
I think the media is stupid. All they do is follow you around and they wont leave you alone. You cant go out with your kids or even go to the restroom without people making a big deal about it.
Period 1. #17 Shantel
I believe that the media should be able to show the world what's going on with celebrities, and even infamous people. It does, however, infringe upon the rights of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. I think this is alright for the media to do because we the people deserve to know what is going on in the world. Also, we need to know whether or not we are going to be in danger. Overall I believe that public access to the lives of famous and infamous people serve a good purpose.
27
I have no idea what to write.
I cant possibly imegane having the constant servalince. But i think that it is not good and the kid deservs some peace.
#11:per1
I agree with number thirteen. The media should only show the wanted and good information, and not the horrible and unwanted information.
per.1 laptop 13
I agree with 11 because many people dont really care about small things or who's going out with who.
period 1 #14
I agree with # 13 because all the media does is disturb people and sometimes it is good
1.
- I think that people who are either famous or infamous should be able to protect their personal privacy. The media should only show what the famous persons wants the media to show the world. Even though the media likes to get into other peoples business. They must put themselves the famous persons shoes, and respect one another personal life.
09
I think that famous or infamous people should be able to protect their personal privacy. The media should only be able to talk about like their movies and things like that not their personal life. I don't know how it could be regulated maybe they could sue the media Im not sure. I don't think it serves any good purpose. In conclusion, famous or infamous people should be able to protect their personal life.
Per1.#18
I think that the media today is a serious problem, they should have like some board of people that look through the magazines and tabloids before they are published, and they are getting way out of control famous and infamous people cant even go outside without being photographed. Look at what happened to Princess Diana! And Michael Jackson got turned into a weirdo because he just wanted to be accepted in society. Many many people are put away in prison for crimes they didn't commit and people are free for ones that they did do. And i think that its because the media manipulates and convinces us of what they want to be the truth. All in all, i believe that the media isn't a good thing and people need to notice that we are ruining famous and infamous peoples lives.
P1.#25
I agree with #14 & #11 because they are both correct, we don't need to know about every breath Obama takes, or anybody else for that matter.
1.15.
Famous or infamous people should be able to protect their personal privacy. The media should be aloud to show certain things like when they have kids, but stay out of their sex life. The media could be regulated by they should be monitored by police. Well no because some of the stuff the media does is against their freedom of speech. This is like this because they are probably hurting the persons feelings. If the media isn't regulated then it would be bad because then maybe they could still hurt those peoples feelings. In conclusion public access can serve a good purpose every once in a while.
#11:per1
i agree with number number 14. If they just went shopping we don't need to know that. They need to only publish things we need to know.
#22 Period 1
I think that all people should be able to protect their personal privacy. the media should only publish what the famous people or infamous people want them to
period 1.#19.
I think that famous or infamous people should be able to protect their personal privacy. The media should be allowed to show some things like what the person wants for people to see and they shouldn't be allowed to show the things that are really none of anybody's buisness. The media could be regulated by thinking to theirself if that is what they want to happen to them. Yes i think that regulation does infringe upon the rights of free speech and freedom of the press because they would have to stop producing lots of information. If the media isn't regulated then it would be the same as it is today. Public access to the lives of the famous/infamous might serve a good purpose because then we can keep track of the criminals of the world. All in all, it depends on the person.
1,8
I think that the media should back off and not monitor everything other people do. All people should have their privacy. I don't think the media should show or take any pictures without the people's consent. I also think that the media should not be allowed to put out any stories that are not true. Some one really needs to do something to the media because one of these days they will go too far. It might say freedom of press, but we also need our privacy. I just think that the media doesn't have a right to do anything they want with the people and not suffer anything for it.
1.2.josh
I agree with you 13 because they need their privacy to. They are humans just like we are. They have rights to privacy just like us.
1.10
I think that anybody in the world no matter who it is, they should still be able to have privacy. The media should be able to monitor things that happen in public, but they should not be able to go on private property. The media could be regulated with cops keeping them away. No because the media doesnt have the right to go on someones property. Someone could end up shooting a media person for being on there property. Yes it would be nice to know whats going on in there lives but you dont always get what you want.
Per. 1. #17 Shantel
#14 has a good point, we don't really care if Brittney Spears goes shopping, or if Kate Goslen disciplines her children.
27
11 has relly good points. The medai will never leave them alone becuse all thay care about is ratings.
period 1 computer 20
i agree with computer 11 because we don't need to know everything that goes on in everybody's life.
period 1 computer 5
I agree with 25 14 and 11 because everyone needs there own privacy
Per. 1 #17
I disagree with #4 because I don't believe they need all that privacy. We have a right to know what is going on.
Post a Comment