The recent exposure of indiscretion by prominent public figures in the news has sent tongues wagging everywhere. Opportunists would have a field day telling their stories and innuendoes of the moral correctness and suitability of such people in places of authority. Character smearing and assassination and taking body shots at people and political parties could be done in all kinds of innocent ways. The media can show more interest and zeal in investigative journalism as part and parcel of their job to cover up their political agenda. What better excuses can one have to put down an enemy of sort?
I am pleasantly surprised that a lot of self restraint and refrain has been exercised on the part of the media to avoid sensationalising such incidents and not to indulge in excessive and repetitive reporting to score political points.
What was left undone was passed to the social media to do the damage needed, to draw blood to the fullest. The internet has seen an unusually insensitive and inquisitive interest in the affairs of these affected men. There were plentiful of calls for more confession, more details to quench their thirst for more lurid news. And of course, it is another case of sorry also must explain. Transparency, they screamed!
The culprits must be hanged or put on the stake to be burnt. Some of the attacks were pretty vicious and hurtful to the parties by obviously upright individuals who are flawless. And thank God there are so many of these morally flawless individuals still living among us. But what could one expect in paradise? Only the best behaved could reside in this heavenly realm.
If only such attacks were to be carried out in the main stream media, one can be sure that the availability of more able people standing out to serve in public offices would immediately dry up. And political parties and the civil service would have to recruit their candidates from the monastry or nunnery. In today’s complex world of permissiveness, even finding a monk or nun not tainted by some indiscretion or personal misconduct could not be an easy task.
The issue is to what moral standard is demanded of people in public offices? Would the people accept others who have crossed the line of social indiscretion to be in public office? If not, if the standard for public service is a pristine life of a puritan, no unsavoury deeds or misconducts, then would there be a need for everyone to make a self declaration of purity and a sinless lifestyle before coming forward to serve? And should a list of unacceptable conduct be assembled and all those appointed to public service be made to swear under oath that they have not breached any of them? Anything short of this is pure hypocrisy.
Could this be one of the reasons why there is a dearth of talents willing to contest for political office and risking the barrage of venoms from the journalists and self proclaimed righteous saints living among us and in the world of cyberspace? How many people are left untainted and above the high standards set by society to be in public service, including those that are pointing the fingers and demanding that everyone should come out clean?