There has been a debate over celebrities’ privacy for a long time. The term “celebrity” really started in the 1700s. Before this, the term famous had already been introduced; both words are similar, but there is a difference between the words. “Celebrity” implies that someone is a “favorable public image”; “famous,” however, only implies that someone is well known to the public eye. Everyone should be given the right to privacy; especially children of celebrities that have not chosen fame. Realistically speaking, however, with the media, celebrities do not have close to the amount of privacy that they should.
One problem that comes up with this topic is that not every celebrity has chosen to be a celebrity. The royal family are all celebrities, though they have not chosen fame. Other celebrities like Taylor Swift, have chosen fame so do they deserve to live with the disadvantages of being famous?
One example of the unfortunate things that have happened because of celebrities’ low levels of privacy is Princess Diana. Princess Diana died in a car crash on August 31, 1997. Her driver was reckless, and the paparazzi was following her car during the time of the crash. This is just one of many unfortunate incidents caused by the paparazzi.
Also, according to the American Civil Liberties Union, “Article 17 of the ICCPR protects everyone from arbitrary or unlawful interferences with their “privacy, family, home, or correspondence,” therefore, every celebrity should have the right to privacy. Celebrities are impacted greatly by the internet and social media where anyone can write anything. This can ruin a celebrity’s popularity and social life.
Celebrities should be allowed privacy, at least, to a certain extent. Everyone should have the right to privacy, and when a celebrity does not have privacy, it can lead to problems. No matter what job someone has, if a person asks for privacy, it should be given.
