拍拍issue8

a debate that whether political leaders should withhold information from the public always exists. when face this issue, quite a few would claim that all information should be shown to the public, but others, on the contrary, deem covering most information as premier choice. recognizing that a more appropriate choice must incorporate aspects of the issue as sufficient as possible, i would rather advocate whether the information should be revealed to the public depends on what kind of the problem the political leader are ready to handle.

Under some circumstances, revealing the information to the public provides no help to solve a problem .instead, it may arouse disagreement or antipathy to the leader among the people. even worse, it may cause panic and turbulence in the society. in fact, some decision can be important to solve a trouble to a sophisticated and wise political leader, (but)while it's so sensitive or technical that it's hard to be understood in an correctly way by ordinary people who are not knowledgable at politics. And a profitable, farsighted action carried by political elites may be misconstrued by public as a severe mistake. thus the execution of the decision may encounters some obstacle from the public and become inefficient. besides, if there's any one were to intend to destroy the peace and steady of the society, he may take advantage of the ignorance of the public. a view that all the information should be disclosed reveal a naivety about the inherent nature of politics and about the sorts of compromises on the part of well-intentioned political leaders necessary in order to further the public's ultimate interests.

having recognized that in some cases withholding information from the public is necessary to serve the interest of public, a responsible and legitimate leadership nevertheless requires forthrightness and frankness with some urgent events, which is need to be reported as early as possible to avoid further loss. Beijing's two different actions in 2003 and 2008 will illustrate my point of view. in 2003, while the SARS spread over Asia, especially in China. in the prior period some leaders in china’s government covered the number of the death and the number of infected people. because of the insufficient awareness of that fatal disease, more and more people got infected and died before long. The situation was nearly out of control for a time. As a result, Beijing had to pay much more effort to handle this, and earn bad reputation for delaying to inform the public. but in 2008, when another well-know disastrous earthquake occurred in Sichuan province, the government of China informed both of the domestic public and world from the beginning. with the help from domestic people and abroad organization and governments, Beijing won the precious time to save a lot of people's. As a consequence, it leads the people came out of the shadow of the disaster as soon as possible, gains the reliance and support of the people in country, and received highly world-wide praise.

In conclusion, whether withholding the information to the public or not depends the type of the information and the exact situation a political leader face with. a wise and sophisticated political leader should learn how to conceal some information to promote some controversial but promising , as well as a responsible leader, he also must know it's crucial to inform the public of some urgent events.