Gawker responds today to widespread bashing it has received for publishing the anonymous "I slept with Christine O'Donnell" piece the other day ( http://gawker.com/5676725/why-we-published-the-christine-odonnell-story?skyline=true&s=i ).
I am not a big Gawker fan - I put it on my Google home page 3 years ago when my daughter moved to Manhattan not knowing exactly what it was but thinking it would alert me to day to day events in the City. I have learned not to take it too seriously, but I do check it out periodically. In this case I find myself 100% on the Gawker's side, and the criticism they have received illustrates a problem with the current public discourse. I am not frustrated with the response from the O'Donnel camp, or other conservatives, and it is likely the whole thing may rebound to their benefit. But the reaction of liberal groups and the mainstream media is frustrating. The Gawker response actually makes their case quite well, and there is nothing in it I do not agree with. I would emphasize that the idea, implied by NOW and other Women's groups, that somehow this kind of article would only be published about a woman public personality is absurd. Make a list of the 10 public people (not actors or singers) who have had the most material published about the sex life, not just in tabloid web sites but also in mainstream outlets, and I wager that 10 out of 10 of them will be men. What is the basis of a rule that basically creates a double standard, that it is okay to publish and even broadcast any rumor from any anonymous source about the sex life of male politicians and celebrities, but it is never okay to publish anything about the sex life of women? As Gawker notes, anyone who knows anything about them knows that they would publish the exact same piece if it had been about a man instead of a woman; I don't celebrate it as quality journalism, but then, that is not what they do, and they have been not doing it for a long time. I am certain that if they had an anonymous piece by Linda Ronstadt describing Jerry Brown's pubic hair they would publish it in a minute. Also as they say: "So no, we don't think there's anything wrong with what Christine O'Donnell did on Halloween three years ago. We think there's something wrong with what she's done every day since, though." I am a feminist, but not the kind that argues for special treatment for women, and not the kind that conspires with fundamentalists to make sex dirty and unmentionable. -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
