"Do you not think that people of fame and influence need to give greater consideration to their statements and actions than any old person in the street ?"In utopia yes, in reality no. And the principle is the same regardless of the issue. Show me one world leader who hasn't at one time or another failed to set a good example. On a much more mundane level, how about all these celebrities who endorse products that could be detrimental to customers ?. And this isn't a new thing, it's been going on since the dawn of time, Henry VIII didn't exactly set a good example to the virtues of marriage or remaining faithful, and the likes of Jimmy Greaves and Paul Gascoigne didn't exactly set a good example in terms of drinking in moderation (indeed one could say their subsequent downfall served as a perverse form of education about the consequences).I'm not aware (and admittedly I haven't looked) that Djokovic has, other than exercising his own personal choice not to have the vaccine, encouraged anyone else not to do so in, unlike rabid anti-vaxxers like Piers Corbin etc. It's only become more than a simple personal choice because of the circumstances resulting from the contradictory stance taken by the respective authorities, and the resulting media attention. No, he can't expect people not to pass judgement on his personal choice, in the same way that every human does to another, we all judge, we all have our own views etc.But to me the notion that just because someone is in the public eye they automatically lose the right to any form of personal choice is alarming.
Adam Beamish ● 1720d