I personally agree ,The outing of gay celebrities is a difficult debate based around the balancing of societal benefit from the act with the rights of individuals to retain their right to privacy over their sexual orientation. Many gay rights activists support the act with websites such as “Queer Attitude” and “Famous and Gay” publicizing openly gay people in the public sphere, and continue to push for further exposure. Counter to this, groups such as the Even the Gay, Lesbian and Allies Senate Staff Caucus in the United States remain fundamentally
If the media should be doing anything, it should be informing us about things like complex geo-political events, environmental degradation, and climate change. Celebrity gossip is not a good use of time for us or for media. Since the media engages in such gossip, however, it should at least have the journalistic standards to stay out of the game of "exposing" the sexual preferences of a group of people widely discriminated against.
No, the media should not expose that a celebrity is gay if the celebrity has not yet made a publc announcement. Encouraging media channels to announce that a celebrity is gay without the celebrity's consent creates an environment of fear. Living in a world where gay celebrities are afraid to go out in public sounds awful.
No, they should not cut out gay people from the media, because there is not a thing wrong with being gay. A lot of gay people are actually really popular, and they are good at getting people to watch shows and are good for people to see on the tv.
It is nobody's business if a celebrity or a regular person is gay or not. There is nothing wrong with liking to shop, knowing the designer of shoes, liking to design clothes, or being vocal enough to voice if someone of the same sex is attractive. There is still too much bigotry in this world. Let someone 'out' themselves instead of dealing with the backlash of being 'outed'