Is it morally acceptable to broadcast private recordings of Diana on TV?
Yes
Side Score: 11
|
 |
No
Side Score: 11
|
|
|
|
|
2
points
I agree because this provides what Diana went through, and it's not "biased" as it could be in books. I get privacy, but if you going to do a report and someone like this, you would like a documentary of it rather than the books as it does not give her facts about her personal life and can make the report "incomplete". I hear over in the U.K that they are a joke, and if it's true, then it shouldn't really matter. Everything gets out eventually, so no use in hiding it. Side: Yes
Well. I think if they are concerned about her adult sons then it begs the question, what are their thoughts on it? As for the rest? I think it's been long enough, it's been more than a decade since her passing and I think it would provide some interesting insight to the life she's lead, her thoughts and what kind of person she was with the upbringing she's had. There have been countless books on her so I don't believe there could be too much shocking footage there to really be concerned about. Side: Yes
"I think it's been long enough, it's been more than a decade since her passing" Would you be happy dying with the knowledge that a decade later your private info would be fair game? If the answer is no then I think that's a good case for why it shouldn't matter how long it's been since someone's death in terms of when it's okay to reveal private info about them. Side: Yes
1
point
There have been countless books on her so I don't believe there could be too much shocking footage there to really be concerned about. If there's no new information to be learnt then what's the point of releasing the recordings? Let it lie, and use the vast amount of resources already present to form a judgement on what her private life was like. Side: No
1
point
I can see many arguments both for and against, but all things considered I believe enough time has passed that showing them is in the public interest. I'm aware this is a complete breach of topic but Diana was -- without doubt -- murdered. She was pregnant with the child of a Muslim whom she had just gotten engaged to and several months prior to her death she wrote a letter in which she specifically warned of her fear that she would be killed by members of the Royal Family. My best guess is that the decision came from Prince Phillip, but who knows? Just like 9/11, Diana's car crash is one of those things which absolutely stinks of a legitimate conspiracy. Side: Yes
I'm normally not one for conspiracy theories, but it does seem a little coincidental that Diana's bodyguard, with whom it was rumoured she was having an affair, was removed from his position and was killed three weeks later in a motorcycle accident. I'm not convinced that Phillip would have made the decisions, though; Diana's actions were reflecting poorly on the rest of the Royal Family and I think it more likely that someone else (maybe someone who was responsible for maintaining their public image) made a private decision to have her killed. Side: Yes
|
2
points
Let's focus at first on Diana herself. From what we know, Diana was a woman who fiercely valued the privacy of her personal life and the personal lives of her children, despite her position. Judging by her character, and not whether it's morally acceptable to release private recordings of any dead person in the first place, do you really believe she would appreciate having such things broadcast for all to see/hear? I think it's pretty obvious that she wouldn't. Now, onto the more broad matter: is it moral to broadcast the private recordings of a dead person, whoever they are? I'd say it's completely subjective, down to the person's character and the nature of the recordings. It's also a matter of whether the family believes it's for the best. So, overall: For Diana? No, and I even think it's morally reprehensible. For any deceased person? It's completely subjective. Side: No
No. But it doesn't matter if it's Diana or anyone else, and I see no reason for it to matter that she's dead, it's just a matter of privacy. I think that everyone should have a right to privacy in these sort of matters, regardless of their standing. If they're dead you could make the 'what do they care' argument, but I think that the fact they wouldn't have wanted private info to go public should still be respected. Also, I don't want to die knowing that private info about me might be released after a while. Side: No
firstly ,everyone has this stuff called privacy...and no one has the right to interfere in anyone's family.she might be a impactful figure but it doesnt mean that we are gonna peek inside her family issues.secondly we have our own family problems and whynot try to solve them rather than thinking about a random family's issues guys are you aware of media piracy and how this has affected every celebrity's life..... a person's life is becaming a source of income for all these narrowminded people. do you know how diana was depressed and stressed when everyday cameras were in front of her she must have really got pissed off. Side: No
1
point
1
point
If you can persuade me that you're willing to make a proper contribution to this debate, I will lift the ban I've just placed. Why does someone else have to prove to you they can make a proper contribution to the debate. Who do you think you are placing a ban on someone, and then they have to justify to you they can make good contributions to any debates. You're not the judge, you're not the be all and end all of their actions and decisions. What if the person doesn't know how to argue according to the level of logic you use to make your arguments, what if the person is just learning how to argue, and because of you, you are preventing them from honing out their skills to become an effective critical thinker? We all must persevere with people lesser than ourselves just like people better than us have to persevere with us. If you don't like someone elses reply to your argument, and their argument is nonsense, tell them it's nonsense but don't ban them. You will do more for them using criticism than you would banning them. Side: Yes
|
