President Obama, when asked what policy he was most proud of instating, replied

that he most valued his policy that at dinner time in the White House, there was no
talk of work allowed. A man who at one point was the most powerful individual on
the face of the Earth, capable of instigating change on a global scale and with the
power to launch nuclear weapons that could destroy the world a hundred times
over, valued his private dinners with his family the most out of everything. This
speaks to the tremendous importance that we as individuals place upon our
personal lives.
In a world that is saturated with social media and instant news, public figures are
subject to scrutiny more than any other time in the history of the human race. The
slightest blunder, whether it be a wardrobe malfunction or a mispronounced word is
quickly slathered across every media outlet possible within a matter of minutes,
even seconds. However, perhaps as a species we have become blinded by our own
hubris and have forgotten to consider the possible consequences of such publicity
on the lives of those it affects. One of the fundamental human rights dictated by the
United Nations is the right to freedom of movement. Public figures in our time are
forced to take extreme measures in order to conceal their identity in public and are
rarely able to travel out in the open without being hoarded by the paparazzi firing a
barrage of questions incessantly towards them. Their fundamental right to the
freedom of movement is impinged upon and yet as a society, we tend to condone
this behavior. In fact, a study conducted at California State University revealed that
there is a higher incidence of anxiety and depression amongst public figures due
which they often attribute to the constant pressure of being scrutinized by the world
at large, even whilst attempting to maintain a normal private life. This is especially
concerning when considering the implications for society at large of mental health
issues in our political leaders. If we are to impose ourselves upon the private lives of
our leaders and cause them unwanted, extra mental strain (on top of the already
colossal strain of being responsible for a nation), then are we not damaging their
ability to think clearly and without anxiety and therefore actually do their job
properly? Do we want to be responsible for an anxious, harrowed leader who then is
unable to make clear, rational decisions because of the significant mental stress he
has experienced? Decisions, which will affect the livelihood of millions of people
across a nation? Public figures are at their core, human beings just like you and me
and deserve to be able to separate their working lives in the public from their
private lives. I believe they deserve to have human relationships and carry out the
same activities that we do in private without being harassed or having it plastered
all over the front page of a newspaper.

It is perhaps even more disturbing when considering that the only other group of
people whose private lives are watched perhaps as closely as those of our public
figures, is the private lives of prisoners in jail. I think it says something about our
society that we treat the private lives of public figures, celebrities political leaders
and the like the same as how we treat the private lives of the people in our society
who have been imprisoned for the most heinous crimes.

Furthermore, how often is a public figure forced to consciously censor themselves as

they speak for fear of being crucified by the media or having their words twisted or
used against them. In an age wherein competition between media outlets is at an
unprecedented high, the need for sensationalism and extravagance when
portraying stories is impelled and leads to peoples words often being twisted and
given meanings that the speaker did not intend. As human beings, we want to
constantly be able to analyze concepts and be introduced to new ideas that could
transform the way we behave.