The value of privacy
Rachel Chistyakov
Voices Editor
My mom’s passing was a very difficult time for me and my family to go through, and all I wanted was a bit of privacy from the Milken community and greater Jewish community. Although I appreciated all of the phone calls, emails and visits, it was something I preferred to go through by myself and, most importantly, I wanted to keep my private life private.
Within the first hours, I was hit with ten different rumors about her death, none of which were true. I asked my friends and classmates to give me some privacy during such a difficult time, but rumors still spread even when I was not at school. Even now, years after her death, I still encounter a rumor every now and then concerning my family. I thought that perhaps this was just how Milken worked; since we attend such a small school, gossiping is almost inevitable. Yes, it hurt my feelings to a great extent to know that rumors about my family life were running throughout Milken, but I thought that it would be better to keep my emotions in check and at least keep the truth for myself. People find things interesting and they gossip about them – it’s an inevitable cycle that even I could not escape.
But as I got older, I noticed this problem inflating. With every student or teacher that leaves Milken, dozens of rumors instantly spread around campus. Whenever a student or a faculty member experiences a death in their family, every student knows about it before the school day ends. It’s gotten to the point where if you hear about an expulsion even an hour after it has happened, you are already behind on the news.
It then extended to celebrity deaths in the media, and after the media frenzy concerning Whitney Houston’s death, I became fed up with the lack of privacy that occurs not only at Milken but throughout the world.
As I watched the coroner’s report concerning Houston’s death, I couldn’t help but to think, “Why am I watching this?” and, “Who needs to know this besides her immediate family?” Why does information concerning the types of drugs that were in her room and why she was in a bathtub concern the general public? Why can’t we be satisfied with simply paying homage to a great singer who had suddenly passed away? Why does her death need to make up her career and basically bring her back into the limelight?
As I considered this trend, I realized that many people that I look up to, including Marilyn Monroe, are mainly known for their controversial and mysterious deaths. The media is always hungry for more evidence concerning Monroe’s mystifying passing, digging for details in the most inappropriate places. Michael Jackson’s death was completely publicized, from the substances found in his apartment to the humiliating trial of his doctor. To make matters worse, many people only began to hear of Jackson and Houston’s songs after they passed away; the same applies to the late Amy Winehouse. Personally, many of my friends didn’t even know my mother’s name until she passed away.
Let me present another pop culture situation for the readers to mull over. Lindsay Lohan has always had a prominent role in the social media, whether it’s her ridiculous intake of drugs, her numerous visits to prison or her several house arrests. She’s a child star gone bad and we can’t help but to watch this train wreck spiral out of control. Many people state that Lohan should be “ignored” or “forgotten,” since her example is a bad one for teenagers who keep up with the news. The same was said about Winehouse before she passed away.
But what would happen if Lohan were to, God forbid, pass away tomorrow? Would the critics who said that she needed to be erased from the media’s scrutiny cheer over her death? Would we still see her as the “bad example” that she is now posing? Or would we see reruns of all of her famous movies being displayed on television? Would her albums, which were disasters when they were first released, suddenly reach the top of the music charts? Would the gossip magazines suddenly turn sympathetic to the pop star whose life had to end so early? This situation parallels the aforementioned celebrity deaths; Houston, Jackson, Winehouse, even Monroe were seen as stars who were going down the wrong path in life. Suddenly, when they were no longer here to scorn, we began to appreciate them more than ever before.
My question is, why couldn’t we show them this love and support when they were still alive?
Perhaps we, as Milken students, should first begin by looking at our own behavior. When a student is sent to the office or is asked to have a meeting with the head of school, privacy should be the best policy: Instead of circulating ten different rumors around campus as to the means of their meeting, we should let things play out for the student – who knows, they might just be having a nice chat with Mr. Ablin.
The most popular source of rumors has been the event of a teacher leaving Milken; this sort of event causes a great stir on campus that seems to never fade out. Whenever this topic comes back up, I can’t help but ask: Why does this matter? If a teacher, especially a very popular and well-liked one, leaves campus, we should feel remorseful but eventually move on. Going back to unproven rumors and creating more buzz benefits no one and it only keeps us plastered in the past. Friends, teachers and faculty come and go – the important thing to do is to appreciate the lessons they have given us and to move forward into a brighter future.
Words hurt. Gossip hurts. I know this personally, along with the majority of students in high school. Therefore, I believe that at Milken, as well as in the greater community, we need to start decreasing the amount of Lashon Harah that occurs. As we have learned in our Jewish studies classes, Lashon Harah creates no progress. We must learn to appreciate what we have now for what it is worth, whether it’s a teacher or a pop star, because they will soon be gone. Ruminating on the past and keeping ambiguous rumors alive is unnecessary and hurtful to the community. Appreciate your teachers and your friends now, while they’re still here for you at Milken, and continue that appreciation even when you are no longer with them. At Milken, our community is all that we have; let’s not jeopardize the strong connections we have through Lashon Harah.
Ami • Feb 16, 2012 at 8:25 pm
Articulate, fascinating, well-written, true, and timely. Keep writing opinion pieces – you’re too good at it not to.
Leigh • Feb 16, 2012 at 5:12 pm
My last comment – to Rachel not IAC
Leigh • Feb 16, 2012 at 5:03 pm
Of course, invading someone’s privacy isn’t something that I support and no one is entitled to personal information. I’m not talking about creating rumors and digging into personal lives. I think there’s a distinction between that and the transfer of information. The spreading of actual, slanderous gossip is selfish in nature. But many people might hastily communicate information that they happen to know because they care deeply about the subject. In many cases this is extremely beneficial because it dispels potentially harmful rumors. The administration informs us with need-to-know information but if people wish to know more, it’s up to them to pursue it or not to, meanwhile maintaining respect for the subject. Every situation is different. Understandably, your situation should have been treated more respectfully by some of the gossipers you alluded to. I just think that the label of “gossip” is slapped on too many things and sometimes it’s actually necessary.
IAC • Feb 16, 2012 at 4:48 pm
There is no real public “right to know”
It comes from the idea that in a democracy, where the public has the ultimate authority, that most of the government should be transparent and open to the public or public view, so that the people could keep themselves up to date on the issues and keep a watchful eye on government.
The media turned that idea into the public’s right to know and used it for things that really invade privacy, such as a celebrity’s private life. They may have chosen to make films or sing or whatever that can lead to fame, but nothing in their career says they waive or give up their legal right to privacy that the media invades. The “Public has a right to know” was used to get popular opinion on the side of the journalists, who used that tactic to excuse their sneaking into homes or workplaces or to jujst badger the person until they obtain a story that can make said journalist a star.
Now when does the public have a right to know? When a toxin has been dumped into public systems that could endanger the masses, when an invading army in en route, and other such times that the public safety requires a dissemination of knowledge to save lives. I am not sure if this is technically a right to know, but again a court trial for criminal cases could be a right to know situation as it behooves people to watch the govt for abuses.
Privacy involves three basic aspects: (1) autonomy, (2) intrusion, and (3) informational privacy.
Based upon the situation, it is possible for an invasion of privacy tort called “placing someone in a false light.” The basic element for placing someone in a false light is that one publishes matters highly offensive that portray another in a false light, attributing to that person views he or she does not hold or actions he or she did not take. In the data matching situation, an incorrect data profile of an individual communicated to a substantial number of persons would produce mental distress.
Other invasion of privacy torts include (1) intrusion into another’s seclusion, (2) appropriation of another’s identity for commercial advantage, and (3) public disclosure of private facts about another.
Contemporary society is passing from an industrial age to a geographic information system GIS information age. The characteristics of a GIS information age are diverse. However, as the production of information becomes a major commercial undertaking, the value of information for its own sake will increase.
Rachel Chistyakov • Feb 16, 2012 at 3:25 pm
Leigh, wanting to know what happened to your teacher should not allow for an invasion of privacy. no matter how much you loved them. If we don’t know the full details behind their leaving, then it should be left like that. Clearly they did not want us to know all of the details concerning their personal lives. When my mom passed, no one was entitled to know what happened- talking about the situation was my decision. When a student leaves, no one at the school has a right to create rumors or dig into their personal lives for information. If the faculty decides to disclose some information, that’s their decision to make; it’s not our place to find the information out for ourselves.
Leigh • Feb 16, 2012 at 1:54 pm
Rachel, this was a really touching and beautifully written article that I’m sure many readers will identify with. I think the points you make about the media and specifically your thoughts on Whitney Houston’s death are so valid and should be addressed on a larger level. By virtue of the fact that we live in the 21st century in one of the most commercialized and material-obsessed cities in the world, we are naturally exposed to and affected by media on a deeper level than other teenagers would be in a different city or 50 years ago.
You’re absolutely right – who needs to know that Whitney was in a bathtub besides those who actually knew and loved her? Media obsession has gotten to the point where the general public feels entitled to the intimate details of certain lives. We are not entitled to anything. Yes, we may feel love towards a singer whose lyrics helped us get through a bad break up or a charming actor who says all the right things, but they’re just incarnations of media molded fluff that we’ve unfortunately been conditioned to worship, not people we actually know. And none of us are innocent. The media encourages us to demonize people one day and fall in love with them the next. All of us, “normal people” and celebrities alike, are victims of the consumerism invasion.
That being said, I don’t think the same idea can be applied to Milken and I disagree with some of the points made about the community. Going back to what Yael and Ethan said^, the people in this community are directly effected by situations like a beloved teacher leaving the school. Gossip is such a gray term and can be so easily manipulated. It’s only natural for people to want to know what happened to someone they truly loved, or a person that someone we truly love, truly loves. We are all interconnected. There’s nothing the administration or anyone can do to stop rumors from spreading because they are only attempts, by people who care, to justify actions. The lightning speed spreading of information is not something that can be helped in such a small and close knit community full of hormonal teenagers in an information obsessed world.
I completely understand your personal struggle and it is never okay to intentionally spread hurtful and untrue statements. However, at least the majority of the time, I think the “gossip” you are referring to is not meant to hurt, but instead to inform a world perpetually starving for information.
Anynomous • Feb 16, 2012 at 11:58 am
beautiful article and something the whole school can relate to. privacy is extremely important and while people might want to be supportive, the person’s feelings are what really matter.
thank you for being a provider of substance to the teen world of writing.
Anonymous • Feb 16, 2012 at 10:58 am
This was such a well written article written at such an appropriate time. Privacy should be privacy.
Daniel Kort • Feb 16, 2012 at 10:54 am
Well said, Rachel. Very heartfelt
Ethan and Yael • Feb 16, 2012 at 9:15 am
Rachel, we think this is the best article you have written this year. Your writing is excellent and the points you made are really great. We disagree a little in that we think that sometimes Milken Students use gossip and rumor telling as a way to cope with the loss of a teacher or celebrity. When you are so close to a teacher, you automatically want to know why they left. But, we think it is important to find a different outlet that is less harmful to others and more in line with the Milken mission statement. On the other hand, something important to consider is that, the administration could possibly be more direct and instead of allowing rumors to matriculate could make an announcement to quiet the masses and stop the group gossiping. Anyhow, we really enjoyed the message you successfully conveyed, and we can’t wait to read more. You are on fire!
Anonymous • Feb 16, 2012 at 8:51 am
this article was soo necessary rachel.