Andrew and Drew put our topic together this week.
Is there a difference between the privacy we expect and the privacy we give others?
On Tuesday, Rochette Joannie, a Canadian figure skater, had the performance of her lifetime. It was a national story because two days prior her mother passed away from a heart attack after arriving in Vancouver to watch her daughter skate. The Canadians have taken great length to protect Rochette from the media and the Canadian Olympic organization has taken some criticism for not allowing reporters to talk to this young skater.
On the radio a reporter said, "It is moments like this, these are Olympic moments!" speaking about the situation surrounding this Canadian skater and expressing his disappointment that the Canadian Olympic organization hasn't allowed interviews.
On the less heroic side of things, another sports figure - Tiger Woods - is under intense media surveillance since admitting to several affairs. Is this really our business?
Finally, do we overemphasize our own private lives on social media sites like Facebook and Twitter? Where should a person draw the line in reading and publishing information about themselves? Is there a perverseness to this obsession?
Here are a few more links to check out:
- Empathy and Voyeurism (NPR)
- Social Media killed privacy (CNN)
- Tiger Woods apologizes to his daughter's pre-school because of paparazzi (Candadian Press)
Does our news media ever move from simple reporting to voyeurism?
Is there something in human nature that makes us want to hear in detail about the tragedies and triumphant in other people's live without actually knowing them?
How differently do we invade someone’s privacy and how much do we let them?
Does your faith/spiritually speak these situations?