I believe in privacy, I believe that people especially when it comes to private emails, personal emails, et cetera, I think people have a right to that privacy.
I do think readers should respect my privacy, but I don't get angry when I get personal questions, because I understand why.
I just respect audiences to understand that that's what goes on in movies. I just try to make movies that respect the intelligence of the audience. Respect that they understand that the narrator is always unreliable and respect that they understand that the medium can do whatever it wants.
It's sad that people will invade someone's privacy - and this is not only regarding someone's private photos - but this goes deep into people's financial privacy, their passwords, their emails, their text messages.
If you were watching CNN, they were saying the NSA is listening to your phone calls. It's reading your emails. When you call your grandma in Arkansas, the NSA knows. All total bulls - t. They made the public more concerned about the privacy issue than the legitimate facts should have done.
I have been villainized because of my identity - I've received nasty blog comments and emails just based on my willingness to identify with feminism by people who clearly don't understand what I value and why I identify as a feminist. Ultimately, I'm less concerned with whether or not people identify as feminist and am more concerned with whether or not people understand what feminism is. If they don't want to identify as a feminist that's fine. I respect people's decision to identify any way they want and expect that same respect in return, although I don't always get it.
Regular people are the problem. It's not the government, it's not the invasive Big Brother, it's the fact that we're a nation of snitches and nosey people who then cry when somebody wants our personal information. I'm talking about people who are being voyeuristic to people's privacy.
I certainly respect privacy and privacy rights. But on the other hand, the first function of government is to guarantee the security of all the people.
A drawing of the nude is a most revealing expression because it is at once the most private and the most personal. Often such drawings are made with no thought of public exhibition. They possess the intimacy of diaries.
I don't want to have anything to do with that: just the fame without personal respect for your privacy.
No film should try to follow a trend, and do what film people think the public wants. There's no such thing as knowing what the public wants.
I think that language matters. I think that people who are in public life have an opportunity to help the public understand issues and understand the urgency of issues. And to that extent, I think it is important how issues are talked about.
What you are talking about is retroactive classification. And the reason that happens is when somebody asks or when you are asked to make information public, I asked all my emails to be made public. Then all the rest of the government gets to weigh in.
Do I have a reasonable expectation of privacy in any information that I share with a company? My Google searches? The emails I send? Do I have a reasonable expectation of privacy in anything but maybe a letter I hand deliver to my wife?
The fact that technology makes it so easy to misuse personal information and encroach on a persons privacy has triggered a debate over whether Indias privacy laws are adequate to protect people.
I like to keep my close people private because I respect their privacy as well. That's my train of thoughts. I'm very fiercely protective of the people that I love the most.