Personal life Vs PRofession

Should a person be judged by his profession or his pesonal life?? With advancement of print and visual media the virtuoso have got credit and popularity as never before. If you have talent it will get accounted (at least) by media. Many celebrities have borne like this only(may be ephemeral who cares!.). With increasing effect of media on socio-economic life of people these celebrities have become the new mark and standards of society. Its also bringing huge paychecks to big companies and themselves (celebs) in terms of advertising. Sometimes mass even show aphorism of these celebs. These are all pros. But its cons are more threatening. All over it has caused greater exposure into celebrties private life. With increasing sting operators and digital devices they are always being captured by someone hidden back at the corner. And as audience is much interested in these page 3 gossips they flare-up like fire in petrol in country. So whats the outcome? One is being much talked about his personal life rather his professional life and performances. This has put extra pressure and anxiety among celebrities. So if we see from point of view of good professionals (being celebrity) is curse to one's personal life. There are so many examples like Mr.Amitabh Bachchan(Do I need to remind u his complex PL at early stage) ,Amir Khan, Salman Rushdie etc. It somehow somewhere hampers their profession. So Am I here to advocate these celebrities, NO. My point is "Is it right to judge virtuoso by his personal life?". No one is good in every field. Every human kind has got issues and he has to pass through low phase. Then why so much media repurcusions(Whats correct spelling??!!) about them .Why don't we just take them as entertainer and professionals and let them do their business. However this is not the end of story. Ther are some celebrities who use media as source for publicity no matter how does it come. Take the blatant act of Rakhi Sawant or Britney Spears or Paris Hilton to gain the publicity. So who is really responsible for all this. Being celebrities throws some responsibilty on oneself to act as noble(at least when camera is on,As per as personal life concerned. Iam not talking about bodice ripper) so that public don't get vicillated.They should keep in mind that they(celebs) are being treated as modern standards and mark of society. Their act directly affects social change(larger than anyother medium). Also its the responsibilty of Media to understand its role in society's growth and development. It should be understood clearly that "The media's the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that's power. Because they control the minds of the masses.” (QUoted by MAlcom X) . However people are more aware of the real truth behind these stories now thanks to internet,blogs etc. But still large mass of popullation in country like India goes with celebrity perception. So now its upon you to decide what prevails personal life or profession..Please do comment..

THE WORLD IS NOT FLAT

The world is small now but its not flat. The fast growing internet/communication has bridged the gap. It has crossed over even the sempiternal boundaries of Atarctika and Sahara desert. Globalisation has obliterated demographical boundaries. Albeit all this has effectuated in abrupt socio- economic change but it NO where concludes that "THE World is Flat". Just IT , outsourcing (BPO,KPO etc.) can't lead to flatness.Physically flatness means where one could see in other's eyes without any deterrence and could walk in shoulder to shoulder with others. In context to world politics flatness is function of capital and power. These factors reside with only few developed countries. Today world is devided in two. Pro USA and non-pro USA nations. By bearing 21% of total expenditure of UNO, US holds authoritative position. US rules over world under the cover of UNO. All world policies are inscribed in favour of few ones.For instance arrogation of Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebnan etc are few examples. Sometimes they absolve the situation like ostracize of Talibans from Afghanistan and dethrone of Saddam's aristocracy. But on lucubration one would find that all these were not just acted to bring calm and peace. Its aim was to intimidate countries which are trying to go against USA ,legally or illegally (It doesn't matters) and to hold strong position on oil basins(energy sources). On one side nuclear tests of Iran and N. Korea are described as act of terrorism and on other side USA is not ready to recognise the Pakistan's abetted terrorism against India. The world has been under " war of attrition" with terrorists for decades but still its definition is not yet unified( even some of terrorists developed under the supervision of USA during cold wars to de-escalate USSR). Whatsoever all this has ruined many innocents. Causualities in wars like this appalingly include large percentage of childrens(who r said to be the future of the nation).So how can one think of flat world with such offensive position of USA and its subsidiaries like U.K. Apart from centralised power the economic gap between developed and developing countries still exist. Though globalisation has proved avant garde in ITs and outsourcing, sectors directly affecting general masses like agriculture and manufacturing are still in dark.New globaliation pact of WTO contains many vile recommentdations which would just aggravate the situatoin. Bridge gap b/w two(developed and developing nations) would widen. Childrens are still drying of hunger and starvation. 40% of world popullation still living in slump. WIth so much contrast how world is flat?. World can be flat only when our ideologies match, we all work together for the welfare of mankind. But is all this possible in this prerogative world?