CreateDebate


Debate Info

111
50
YES NO
Debate Score:161
Arguments:41
Total Votes:199
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 YES (23)
 
 NO (18)

Debate Creator

MohammadNoor(35) pic



Do you agree that public figures should be held accountable for their actions?

YES

Side Score: 111
VS.

NO

Side Score: 50
8 points

Public figures should be held accountable for all their public and private actions as they are meant to be all-rounded role models. Some actions undertaken in private might break the law, offend moral standards or question their integrity, thus providing a full picture of the public figure. An example is a former respectable USA president, Bill Clinton. He had an affair with Monica Lewinsky, and even during his oath taking, he lied about the affair. That was not only a question of his integrity, but also a question of serial perjury, the giving of false testimony under oath, which broke the law. Thus, public figures should be held accountable for all their public or private actions, as they may question a public figure’s integrity or even break the law, and they are no longer perceived as all-rounded role models.

Side: YES
1 point

The lives of public figures shows the possibilities of the outcomes of actions. This would give the public the idea that the consequences of the public figure's actions will be the same as their own. For example, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates have showed us that one does not need to graduate from university to become a successful entrepreneur. Hence, this paved the way for more people to take the risk of starting up their own businesses. If a public figure is not accountable for his or her irresponsible actions, many people will start to follow suit, causing social problems to rise. Hence, public figures should be held accountable for their actions as they are forced into becoming role models for the public.

Side: YES
8 points

Public figures are representatives of their community. This indicates that they have to uphold a certain image of their community and themselves for the public. Therefore, what they do in public and in private is often scrutinised. To uphold the public relations image that they have, they need to be held accountable for their own actions. Michael phelps being a leading olympic swimmer, he had photos of himself utilising marijuana posted onto the internet by his friends. This caused sponsors like kelloggs to drop him as his public image has changed. This shows that public images given off by public figurws are often affected by their own private actions. Therefore, public figures ought to be held accountable for their actions.

-Jonathan-

Side: YES
cheerios(1) Disputed
1 point

Although public figures are representatives of their community, they still deserve their own rights to privacy. Just like any other human being, they ought to have their own personal space and time. Personal lives should not be an interference to their work. Furthermore, the actions by public figures are usually exacerbated by the media in an attempt to sensationalize their news articles or stories. When we strip status and wealth down, we are all basically the same so why do public figures have to be deserve different treatment as they too deserve human rights?

Side: NO
7 points

With technological advances in the past few decades, innovations such as the Internet allows us to access information all around the world. We have taken pride in how well informed we are, which at the same time guarantees an increase in the transparency of the private lives of public figures. The actions of public figures yield a huge influence over society as the media finds its role in exploiting the private lives of these people. Inevitably, we have developed an unhealthy obsession with the lifestyles of public figures, especially those of celebrities. In the recent years, the fan base of celebrity magazines and tabloid newspapers has grown exponentially and still going strong. According to Romania-insider,the tabloid Libertatea, with 1.25 million readers each issue, occupies the first place in the readership of print media in Romania, showing our noxious and unflagging obsession with the private lives of celebrities and other public figures. With the troubling widespread influence of public figures in our society, it is of upmost importance that they are held accountable for their private actions, as immoral and destructive actions that they engage in will no doubt sway the mindsets of the public, especially the impressible youth, who are the greatest market for celebrity orientated media. Hence, public figures have to be held responsible for their unacceptable behavior even in private, as their lifestyles are made known to many across the globe, and would play a major role in influencing the mindsets of the world should they not be responsible and account for their private actions. Due to their massive influence over todays society, public figures should be held accountable for their public actions.

Side: YES
7 points

In the past, remarks are easily forgotten due to the absence of efficient recording devices. However in recent years, due to the rapid development in technology, people have become more connected through cyberspace. Inevitably, public figures are considered one of the main attraction in the cyberspace circus. With so many eyes on them, public figures are pressurised to become the role model of many. They possess the ability to alter the mindset of multiple communities. Just a few months back, National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) Membership Assistant Director Amy Cheong was dismissed from her post due to an offensive, personal remark published on Facebook. Such irresponsible actions could potentially damage the harmonious, multi-cultural Singapore, and spark racial disputes in Singapore. The news spread across Singapore in a short amount of time, and persisted even after the remark was removed. The cause of commotion was not mainly the remark, but rather her designation. Wherever she was, she represented more than herself. Hence, this shows that it is difficult to draw a clear divide between the public and private lives of many public figures. Thus, public figures have no choice but to behave themselves in all areas of their lives.

Side: YES
cheerios(1) Disputed
1 point

In our modern world, people have begun to look up to public figures, for example, politicians and celebrities and the media plays a part in making people believe that public figures are the epitome of all that is good. However, we tend to forget that even the greatest role models are susceptible to the most basic of human mistakes. After all, they are still human. Upon committing a mistake, public figures should be given a fair chance, like everyone else like you and me, to amend their mistakes and treat it as a learning experience for the future. However, the media tends to invade the privacy of public figures and aggravate the nature of the mistakes made by them in an attempt to sensationalize their news articles or stories.

Side: NO
7 points

Recently in Singapore, there were cases of extra-marital affairs by politicians being made in public. With the increase of such events, we will start to question if these public figures should be led accountable for their private lives. Public figures, especially politicians, have influence over decisions that will affect the country, and control over public funds. While their job is to represent the public, they have their private lives, where decisions made are about themselves. Although this might only seem fair for the public figures, they might start to engage in vices which corrode their moral values. This in turn will impair their judgement, such that they make the wrong decisions and start to use their power over public resources for their own benefit. Again, due to the lack of accountability in their private lives, they will start to tie the line as to how much they can do before getting into trouble. Therefore, public figures should be held accountable for their actions, even those undertaken in public.

Side: YES
cheerios(1) Disputed
1 point

From what you said "This in turn will impair their judgement, such that they make the wrong decisions and start to use their power over public resources for their own benefit.", there is no evidence that actions undertaken in private involving vices will impair their judgement and cause them to make mistakes.

Also, despite public figures having a higher status, when you strip everything down including their status, there is no difference between us and them, so why should they be treated differently compared to us?

Side: NO
7 points

I agree that pubic figures should be held accountable for their actions, enven actions undertaken in private. Public figures do know that they are looked up to by thousands, perhaps millions, of fans. Therefore they have a responsibility to act as role models. It was reported that Jay Chou, a well-known singer and composer, spoke vulgarities when he found himself followed by paparazzi as he was walking in the street. His use of foul language was widely known and was once the hottest topic on many online forums. It has also raised discussions and questions among people whether public figures like Jay Chou should be responsible for their behavior and language. In fact, nowadays public figures are exposed to various types of media and hence their actions are observed by many people in the public. Also, as normal citizens, they should conduct responsible behavior even during their private life, regardless of degree of exposure.

Side: YES
cheerios(1) Disputed
1 point

Based on your example on Jay Chou, do you feel that he became a public figure because he wanted to be a role model to the society or is it more due to his love and passion for music? Isn't it morally incorrect to thrust upon a responsibility onto a person without the person wanting it? Although he might be glorified and looked up to by people around the world, his main role is to do his public job well. Also, public figures just like everyone else are humans too just like us. Would you like it if people started scrutinizing your every action?

Side: NO
7 points

Yes, they should be held accountable for their actions as they affect on how we deem their occupation/art. These will affect those in the same industry/ platform, for instance, the extra marital affairs by our civil officers have led to the checks on other officers, thus their actions have to be accounted for.

Side: YES
7 points

These public figures should be held accountable for all their actions including those undertaken in private. By holding them accountable, it would give the public space to reconsider following these figures instead of doing so blindly, as it would prove that there will be times when their decisions are not for the benefit of the public but rather for themselves. Furthermore, other public figures would also be able to have a chance to reflect upon themselves by seeing how other public figures are being taken accountable for their actions. An example is the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) incident where the CEO embezzled money that was meant for donations to increase his salary and to renovate his office. He was sent to 15 months in prison. This proved as a warning for other organizations and made the public more wary of making donations in future.

Side: YES
7 points

Public figures are supposed to be the face of the organisations they belong to. With these responsibilities in mind, they are the center of attraction around the world and with this power comes responsibilities. 'With great power comes great responsibility.' - Ben Parker, Spiderman 2. We do agree that there is a need to allow them to have their own privacy. There is also a need to understand that whatever they do should not be covered using the power they have. Justice is the foundation of every organisation and to save the reputation of the organisation the person should not be allowed to not get punished. They have a moral and social obligation to model the way. This is more applicable when taking into consideration public figures such as politicians due to the fact that they are supposed to be leading us and if they take actions on things that are immoral and affecting others how can they lead us? If we do not know this side to the politicians we will not know who to support and who to detest, while not depriving of the privacy. As they say, actions speak louder than words.

Side: YES
6 points

I believe that public figures should be held accountable for their actions, even those undertaken in private. Public figures are representatives of their respective communities and role models for others to look up to and follow. Should their actions break the law or offend moral standards, they should indeed be held accountable for those actions. For example, Michael Palmer, was in charge of Punggol East SMC and was also the Speaker of Parliament. After being caught in an extra marital affair, he resigned, causing a by election. Hence public figures should be held accountable for actions undertaken in private because they are respected role models for their communities.

Side: YES
2 points

Moral standards are set by society since most people have an idea of what should be accepted and what should not. Hence these standards are simply expectations of the public.

Side: YES
cheerios(1) Disputed
2 points

I agree that public figures are representatives of their respective communities and role models for others to look up to and follow. However, do your really think that they chose this duty to be representatives and role models for others? They would most likely have taken up their duty because they feel they have something to contribute in the field or they have passion for it. Don't you think it unfair for someone to thrust upon responsibility to you? After all, in their lifestyles, they do need some time to remove their masks and not be under the intense scrutiny of the public as they are no different from us other than status and wealth.

Side: NO
5 points

Public figures, whether they choose to be or not, are considered role models by the society. Role models have to watch their actions, be it in private or public, as they are being scrutinized by the media 24/7. Positive actions are praised by the media and public, encouraging others to follow the example, while negative actions are promptly condemned. Take a look at athletes, they are seen as pillars of strength, of endurance and determination. They exemplify the idiom 'no pain, no gain'. They are rightly the kind of people we should be looking up to and following in the footsteps of. Yet when Tiger Woods became tangled in a sex scandal, this wonderful image of him shattered, and gave the public, whose money Tiger Woods lives on, another view of him to consider. Public figures often live on the money of the public, and as such have absolutely no control over their private lives should they wish to remain as such. Every action is being watched by the media, and that is where the public gleans its information as to make the decision to continue supporting them or not. To correctly gauge the figure the public is supporting, information regarding their private lives, which is considered to be a more accurate image of the figure, has become a necessity. Hence, public figures should be held accountable for their actions, for their dependence on the money from the public should rightly be subject to scrutiny, and thereby, accountability.

Side: YES
4 points

The former CEO of NKF is T. T Durai.

In addition, it is only fair that public figures are held accountable for all their actions as the public are also charged for similar actions.

Side: YES
3 points

Why can't we all just be held accountable for our actions?

Side: NO
cheerios(1) Disputed
2 points

I agree, we are all humans so why should one human be treated differently compared to others just because of their popularity or wealth especially involving actions undertaken in private? Doesn't this conflict with Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998?

Side: YES
3 points

The public demands transparency of the public figures' actions, even if it is undertaken privately. The undue supervision actually encroaches upon right of privacy which the public figures are entitled to as per usual. As a result, their daily life is interrupted and unhappiness and social fragmentation arise among the public. What is more, the freedom that the public has may give rise to spread of rumours of the public figures, which can result in distrust in the society. Therefore, the public figures do not necessarily justify their actions to the public.

Side: NO
3 points

I disagree that public figures should be held accountable for their actions. In this day and age, with the media fueled by public curiosity, articles reporting the actions of public figures dominate magazines and newspapers. This has led to many accounts of public figures being probed about their private lives and even being hounded by the press. If this were done to any one of us, it could be considered as an invasion of privacy, yet even private actions of public figures are publicised. Furthermore, the media has the tendency to sensationalise news published, often delivering news that blow things out of proportion. This is unfair to public figures they are entitled to their own privacy, and should not especially come under the scrutiny of the public eye. Therefore, we should all respect the privacy of public figures.

Side: NO
1 point

This is also supported by the Human Rights Act 1998 Article 8 which is the right to respect private and family life. So, public figures deserve no different treatment compared to everyone else and deserve human rights.

Side: NO
2 points

Public figures are humans too like everyone else, hence, they too need privacy just like everyone else. In fact, giving partial treatment and having different expectations for different people in our society could harm the functioning of democracy. Continual probing into the lives of public figures will leave very few of them with a clean record as many of them might have taken embarrassing actions when they were young and irresponsible. Hence, those who might have been able to succeed in life could have their talents denied for public good due to their past records. Furthermore most public figures are in their position because they enjoy their public jobs or are good at what they do and not because they want to be role models or claim any moral status. Hence, it is morally biased against them so public figures deserve the same rights to privacy and accountability for their actions as the rest of us because when we strip all our status and wealth, we are fundamentally the same.

Side: NO
choccolover(2) Disputed
3 points

Even though it is often argued that there is no need for public figures to account for their private activities as long as they perform in their jobs, what they do in private inevitably matters as it would not only create a lasting impact on the society, but also when it breaks the law. Performance at work does not exempt anyone from obeying the laws of the land, and public figures still have to account for their actions without shrinking from the responsibility. This is especially true with the high corruption cases involving national leaders such as former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and Taiwan’s former President Chan Shui Bian prove. Despite their positions as high profile public figures, their actions in private still calls for state punishment, forcing them to account for such undesirable actions. To ensure that the public upkeeps the confidence towards the court, believing in its impartiality and justice, public figures have to account for their private actions, especially illegal ones, regardless of how well they excel in their jobs.

Side: YES
cheerios(1) Disputed
2 points

Although the actions of public figures have great influence on the society, they need their privacy too as many of them are not in their positions because they want to be role-models to others. For example, Tottenham Hotspur Football Club defender Benoit Assou-Ekotto has stated, he had no desire to end up in an office job he wasn't suited to so football became the means to ensure he could live out his life comfortably and not because he wanted to act as a role-model to other footballers our there. Hence, it is morally incorrect to treat public figures differently.

Side: NO
VivekT(31) Disputed
3 points

"In fact, giving partial treatment and having different expectations for different people in our society could harm the functioning of democracy."

Deomcracy is built on giving different people different expectation in society to work differently and give different outcomes. It is how a democracy is built and communism on the other side would have similar expectations. However, giving similar expectations just puts a barrier on the development of society in that place. It is the ability to stand out of the crowd to develop and serve in a bigger scale. If you say these people deserve the same recognition though they have done much more then so be it, they will have the same accountability. However. that is not how it works in this world.

Side: YES
lhyCraig(14) Disputed
2 points

Traditionally, one would judge a person by materialistic means, such as wealth and social status. But today’s hard truth is, reputation is key to a public figure’s job-well-done. Back in year 2005, the scandal at National Kidney Foundation (NKF) was one of the biggest stories of the year. Chief Executive Officer TT Durai was criticised for wastefulness and extravagance. There was substantiate evidence that he had been wasting company funds. A gold tap had been installed in the executive bathroom; he had been flying first-class; his annual income amounted to 600 thousand dollars. People started to lose confidence in NKF. For more than a decade, NKF raised millions of dollars annual by having Mediacorp’s top stars perform stunts. As of 2012, NFK is suffering from a deficit of 5 million dollars. Even though NKF have been doing its job of helping dialysis patients, the personal mistakes of a public figure have caused detrimental effects to NKF—it can no longer do its job well. Hence, this shows that the public figures depend on their reputation to do their job. And to maintain their reputation, they need to be mindful of their actions in both the public and private aspects of their lives.

Side: YES
Davinaling(5) Disputed
2 points

Giving partial treatment and having different expectations does no affect democracy. For democracy is a system of merits. Whatever hardwork a person puts in, they will receive a reward. ( certificates, positions...) expecting them to be same is not part of democracy. The treatment of the people are also different. (Like lower income group gets more support and the higher income gets more tax...)

Side: YES
2 points

Public figures have become the icon of the masses. Spread by social media and accelerated by interest groups, their status and actions are known by millions in the blink of an eye. The opinions of these masses can sometimes have been misinterpreted by those in the first surrounding circle, and these interpretations can be compounded every time their story is spread over the internet. This results in a flow of information similar to the activity where a story is spread along a chain of people. Gradually, the story becomes distorted as people change it according to their interpretations, and input their own opinions when retelling events. Social media has also produced a population that is less critical to the reliability of sources of information, and who would readily believe the stories told by their friends. The people of the online world, used to the swiftness at which decisions are made at the speed of electricity, also provides their views towards an issue when it it first posted. This can lead to a "superman" expectation of the public figure, an image which we, as humans can sometimes fail to uphold. Thus, public figures should be granted some measure of unaccountability, as we may base their actions against our expectations of them. Since these expectations may spawn from rumours and compounded interpretations and opinions, we should be more tolerable when these public figures fail to fulfill what we expect of them.

Side: NO
2 points

Let us take a politician as an example. The politician is a public figure, who chooses a path from a common consensus for the majority to follow. The politician takes actions that benefit the people. Whether it is in the short-term, or for the long-term. the politician is obliged to choose the best path. The politician may scheme or manipulate for the good of the people. When everything goes to hell however, the politician should not be held accountable for their actions, for they chose the best path at the time that they believed would be for the greatest good of the people. Using the politician as the typical example of a public figure, I therefore argue that the public figure should NOT be held accountable for their actions.

Side: NO
comasense(20) Disputed
1 point

In a perfect world ..maybe...But You base that on that politicians are always doing what is best... that is completely false..Politicians(all men)are very susceptible to greed and erroneous capitalism...It is when these people do harm and do not stand accountable that the people see the hypocrisy in our government...Kinda like a man that steals to feed his family goes to prison, but a wall street banker conspires illegally to gain millions to add to his many and gets a warning..or a bonus...or i guess maybe a pay cut...People are more informed now and that kinda behavior is seen to have know benefit to society....

Side: YES
2 points

Public figures should be aware of their position and the heavy responsibility of being morally upright. But more often than not, public figures who think they are doing "right" will be opposed by a small pocket of people who are obsessed with the public figures, especially celebrities, to have a prim and proper life free of any blemish. That cannot be achieved with human nature to commit occasional slip ups, which is forgivable. What public figures are subject to is the sensationalisation of that by the media, which is the only source of information for the public most of the time. This leads to misguided speculations made by the public and the general public will have a distorted overview of the issue. As a result, what public figures have to be "accountable" for may not be what they have even committed. Recently, Ng Boon Gay who has been under public scrutiny for being accused for having an extra marital affair, has been declared innocent.

Side: NO
1 point

I don't agree that public figures should be held accountable for their actions. They have greater ability and power than normal people and since they had done a lot for the people, they should not held accountable for their actions. Here is an example, Chinese former chairman Mao Ze Dong is one of the greatest leaders of China. He led the Chinese people defend the country from the attack by Japanese. After that, he also liberated the country from the Chinese nationalist party. Although after the war he started the horrible cultural revolution which slowed down the pace of development in the country, he was still considered a great leader because of his achievements. To sum up, public figures should not be held accountable for their actions as they had contributed to the society.

Side: NO
VivekT(31) Disputed
2 points

A society is built on ideas and not people. If a person is able to do something well and the fail at the second part. It is our duty to make the person understand. I think that they should be accountable for their actions and by saying this accountable for the successes and accountable for the failures. We will not allow people who had proven themselves to continue and the not be able to deliver as much. We will have to take into consideration both the successes and failures.

Side: YES
1 point

I disagree that public figures should be held accountable for all their actions, especially actions taken in private. Public figures should not be forced into justifying all their personal actions to the whole world. It cannot be denied that each individual should be responsible for their actions, bearing the consequences. However, everyone needs their personal space. They should be given a chance to change. The social media industry showcases their exaggerated version of the public figures' private life, often distorting facts. Scandals and rumors online inevitably inviting judgmental comments. This does not give public figures time and space to correct what they have done. One will not be able to return to their work post immediately after a negative image of them is shaped by the media, and it will be difficult to reverse the effects. Recently, the bribery case involving a former high ranked chief of the Central Narcotics Bureau, Ng Boon Gay, is widely discussed in newspaper and forums. From all the rumors, people will deem him unfit as a civil servant and question his ability. Everyone makes mistakes and no one will like it when their mistakes are widely discussed by others. Public figures should be entitled to their own privacy.

- Kimberly

Side: NO
1 point

The public figures should not be held accountable for their own actions, even those undertaken in private, as every public figure should be given their own right to privacy. With the revolution of technology in the 21st century, the use of media is no longer just to disseminate news and information worldwide, but to act as watchdogs, scrutinising the every action of public figures. This use of media can be perceived as an invasion of privacy towards the lives of public figures. After all, every public figure is also an individual that should be entitled to their own privacy rights. The achievement of "public" status of public figures should not deprive them of their own human rights. Thus they should not be held accountable for their every action and should be given their own personal space where actions made are being the curtains and not under the watchful eyes of the public.

Side: NO
choccolover(2) Disputed
1 point

Both politicians and celebrities have to accept that their private choices matter to the public because they are no longer living privately, but very publicly on public money. It is a sacrifice they have made for the fame and fortune that they are guaranteed with when they make the crucial decision to commit to such a job.

Side: YES
1 point

By Ziying:

Public figures should not be accountable for their actions in private because this does not do justice to their human rights when their actions taken in private will affect their image in the public's eyes.

As technology advances which leads to the rise of new media, news are able to be spread across the world at an accelerated rate. However, the media coverage on the private lives of public figures has led to the increase of curiosity of the public to find out more about public figures' private lives which are deemed more sensational and interesting to know about. As a result of the increasing demand and interest of the public, the media now has to dig out the private stories of public figures in order to entertain and thus achieve popularity of the public for the media.

This change in the public's interest about public figures encouraged by the media coverage on public figures' private lives have led to the revelation of the ugly sides of certain public figures' private lives. To avoid the embarrassment and ruin of their own images, public figures, for instance those in the entertainment circle, will avoid getting into relationships with the opposite gender as when the relationships, which are part of their private lives, are known by their fans through the rapid media coverage, their image and popularity will be affected and so will the opportunities given to them at work. For instance, the advertising industry is more likely to seek public figure who are widely popular among the public to advertise for the products.

Hence, the sacrifice that has to be made by public figures for their career is too great when their human rights and freedom of enjoying private relationships with their loved ones are compromised.

Hence, to do justice to the public figures, media should stop covering the private lives of public figures and if the public figure were to be willingly to share certain parts of their private acts with the public, they can easily do so through social media such as their Twitter and Facebook accounts.

By doing so, the public figures are allowed to have rooms for themselves while the appetite of the public is satisfied to a certain degree that does not affect the human rights of public figures when the sharing of private lives is initiated by the public figures themselves.

Side: NO