Current Affairs: Murdoch's murdered media

Many would probably have heard about how the reporters of British tabloid News of The World have engaged in the phone-hacking of various members of the public, resulting in public outcry which ultimately resulted in the downfall of the newspaper. Though it was quite well-known to the public beforehand that the publication hacked the phones of royals and celebrities before - they would not have obtained confidential information otherwise - but the difference this time was that they hacked the phones of ordinary people - the relatives of a 13 year-old murder victim, relatives of dead soldiers - which resulted in the anger the public felt. After all, if the tabloid was willing to hack the phones of ordinary people, what was to stop them from hacking their own phones? As a result, the scandal-monger was now the object of scandal.

What I think is that the News of The World should not have engaged in phone-hacking in the first place. Though the English public may feel that privacy is a sacrifice that celebrities and royals have to make for their extravagant lifestyles, I disagree. Of course, being a famous person would almost definitely mean that one's life is almost never private - there is always the paparazzi - but that does not warrant for their phones to be hacked. When the paparazzi is after someone, they are looking at what a person does in public. They do not follow them to their homes and see what they do in there. However, when they hack into a phone, they are infringing the person's privacy. They look at exchanges between a person and others, which can sometimes be intensely personal, as compared to what the two people may do when in public sight. I think that royals and celebrities have a right to their privacy. Royals are the figurehead of a country - to be honest, I do not even know who the British Prime Minister is - and should therefore be shown respect. Imagine if another country reads about all the scandalous affairs regarding the figurehead. What would they think of the people there? Celebrities should also deserve some privacy. Though some may say that it is a sacrifice they must make for their salaries and extravagant lifestyles, I disagree. A Chief Executive Officer in the private sector may earn millions and have an extravagant lifestyle, but does that mean his privacy should be invaded? Is his privacy even ever invaded? No. Of course, those people may say then, that privacy is a sacrifice for a celebrities fame. Yet, the reason why these actors, singers, directors and all the range of celebrities, are famous, is because they have talent. Should one's privacy be threatened because one is talented in a certain area? Having said all these, I think you know my stand on the hacking of the phones of the public.

Of course, this does not mean that royals and celebrities should therefore be allowed to have scandalous affairs, but sometimes, it cannot be helped. What more of the general public? Obviously they would be unable to prevent the traumatic events which shoot them up to fame. Some may say that the point of a tabloid is to gain sensational news, and that due to Britain's laws that what the Press prints must have evidence to back it up, the only way for News of The World to keep up its business was to hack into the phones of celebrities and royals. I agree that tabloids have to keep up their business, however, I think that they should use other methods of obtaining sensational news rather then infringing the privacy of an individual. A tabloid provides entertainment value to the public, and they of course would not want to see the collapse of their source of gossip, that is, of course, unless the tabloid happens to commit a great offence against the,. I think that if tabloids truly wanted to find out more information, they could do it through interviews. Although the information revealed may not be as sensational, however, I am sure that the tabloids are able to twist people's words and use it to their advantage.

I think that what this event has taught us is how much the public values their privacy, and to a certain extent, the hypocrisy of the public. It has also showed us how, with the advancement of technology, new ways are always being found to gain access to more information. It has also showed us that we cannot trust technology, as something else more technologically advanced may be able to hack in to it, and from this, what I think is the most important takeaway, is that while technology has improved the lives of many people, it has decreased the morality of many others.