its good we know thir private life, this helps us keep a tab on how extravagant they are with tax-payers money.in my country nigeria, we got to knw about thir lootings frm their life style.they are public officeholder so let all be public.we need as change

Politicians should not be able to hide details of their have private lives when in office. As journalists, we have a responsibility to make sure constituents are in a position to know who they are voting for.

However, responsible journalism (and all codes of conducts worth their salt) should ensure that reporting private lives of politicians – or any other members of society whose lives are of public interest – concentrates on delivering the details without unnecessary, opinionated comment.

The private life of a public official would be worth publishing if it has an impact on the public office the personality occupies or if his/her services to the people are affected by it.

if someone aspires to be a publis figure, a leader,everyone has a right to know him in full. the public person should be cautious enough not to have too many skeletons in his private life. otherwise the truth will out. the public has a right to know whether the leader practises what he preaches. the media is just doing its job.

Whilst the integrity of our leaders is reflected in their everyday actions, they also deserve a degree of privacy. The media frequently over exposes many issues that are simply irrelevant and non-consequential to day to successful daily responsibilities of governing. What is important is that the people we choose to govern, take their responsibility seriously. There are too many who abuse their positions of power and leave a poor reputation and much scrutiny on those who do fulfil their role with dedication, respect and subservience.
Certainly more focus should be placed on the political achievements and productiveness of these people and less on how they spend their free time.

The more prominent you become the less privacy you enjoy. I that lose of privacy is the cost you have pay for your public status. But whereas i recognize the right of privacy of the public officials and politicians, i also think that it goes with responsibility on their part.

I say this because i have seen a tendency by such prominent people to do some things they clearly know they are ridiculous in public only to turn round and say they should be left alone by the media.

A good example presented itself in Kenya last year when some Members of Parliament were captured by a LIVE broacast dozing during parliament proceedings in which the national budget was being read. Angered by their the media for capturing them asleep, the MPs pressed the House Speaker to take action against the TV station and to restrict the stations from ever showing MP asleep on the argument that doing that was invading the MPs' privacy.

Many people were surprised by the ridiculous claim for privacy by the MPs and there was near public consensus that: If they want to sleep why do it in parliament, a public institution where the MPs are supposed to be most awake especially for such an important business as the national budget.

Somebody even argued that the media in some countries in Europe could not dare capture an MP asleep inside parliament because the media there regards it as an intrusion to privacy? Colleagues, out there in Europe, is this true?

Meanwhile, unwary journalists will continue capturing the parliamentarians who are sleeping on their job.

In India the media has by and large resisted the temptation to cover private life of politicians or bureaucrats. But of late the private lives of powerful lot has started interfering in their public life-- in other words they have started interfering/ influencing public decisions. This is wrong. If people in power don't want the media to enter their bed rooms then they should take all caution to keep their private lives private and now allow it to enter the public domain. It hardly matters if the CM has one wife and one live in but if live in starts taking government decisions, then media has to shift its focus to the person calling shots. Second sometimes the family comes to media for support, especially incases of illicit relationship. They also go to the police along with media. Question is should we cover such events -- the stories are juicy but sometimes only one version comes out a nd children suffer the most.

The private lives of public figures becomes public interest if it infringes on the rights of the public and if their private acts become criminal in nature. Can they steal? No. Can they have an extramarital affair and be brought to courts of law by discruntled wives? No. Can they abuse their children or batter their wives? Certainly not. Why not? Because they are expected to enact laws in parliament to protect the rights of the vulnerable. How can they do that if they do not know the difference or do not respect the law? Public Figures are law abiding citizens before they are elected to lead others. It is however bad reporting to fail as a journalist to point out the public interest. As journalists we tend to enjoy the scandal rather than the lesson. People who violate human rights should not be elected into office.

The world is too busy for every body. Whereas the serious news stories are very important (they provide information), but we have thousands of news channels-television, internet, radio,serios newspapers,news agencies etc. The private lives of our readers make the difference. The mixture of hard news stories and gossip/private lives of leaders) make newspapers a must read. The point is editors need to balance and draw a line between gossip and serious stories.

I am of the opinion that the monent you accept a public office your right to privacy has been given up. this is because as a public officer, you must live above reproach no minding the fact human beings are infallible. That is the sacrifice you have to contend with. Infact the issue of media intrusion into the private lives of public officers is the raging issue in Ghana now. And strangely, some senor journalists are siding with office holders, citing some unknown ethics to support their arguments.

What I look for in a leader is his/her ability to lead. Period. As long as s/he does that job, splendid. Beautiful. I think the excess coverage the media give to the private lives of politicians is useless and irresponsible and, unless it involves misuse of public resources (and I mean MONEY, not house space--they have to live where they live!) distracts attention from issues that are of grave importance to our entire nation. Such matters are none of our business.

To recap:

Death toll in Iraq = important Political sex "scandal" = not so much

Once you accept to serve the public as a politician or civil servant, you will have also accepted to open up your life to the same public. You should lead by example. Once you involve yourself in inappropriate behaviour, don't be suprised when the media takes it up. That is their job anyway.

Ali Balunywa, The Netherlands

In India the media has by and large resisted the temptation to cover private life of politicians or bureaucrats. But of late the private lives of powerful lot has started interfering in their public life-- in other words they have started interfering/ influencing public decisions. This is wrong. If people in power don't want the media to enter their bed rooms then they should take all caution to keep their private lives private and now allow it to enter the public domain. It hardly matters if the CM has one wife and one live in but if live in starts taking government decisions, then media has to shift its focus to the person calling shots. Second sometimes the family comes to media for support, especially incases of illicit relationship. They also go to the police along with media. Question is should we cover such events -- the stories are juicy but sometimes only one version comes out a nd children suffer the most.