Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 41

Thread: Media Sitting On A Devastating Sex Scandal?

  1. #1

    Media Sitting On A Devastating Sex Scandal?

    Involving a leading Presidential candidate.

    [url]http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/ronrosenbaum/2007/10/29/shocking_inside_dc_scandal_rum.php[/url]

    [QUOTE]Shocking Inside DC Scandal Rumor: A Media Ethics Dilemma

    So I was down in DC this past weekend and happened to run into a well-connected media person, who told me flatly, unequivocally that “everyone knows” The LA Times was sitting on a story, all wrapped up and ready to go about what is a potentially devastating sexual scandal involving a leading Presidential candidate. “Everyone knows” meaning everyone in the DC mainstream media political reporting world. “Sitting on it” because the paper couldn’t decide the complex ethics of whether and when to run it. The way I heard it they’d had it for a while but don’t know what to do. The person who told me )not an LAT person) knows I write and didn’t say “don’t write about this”.

    If it’s true, I don’t envy the LAT. I respect their hesitation, their dilemma, deciding to run or not to run it raises a lot of difficult journalism ethics questions and they’re likely to be attacked, when it comes out—the story or their suppression of the story—whatever they do.


    I’ve been sensing hints that something’s going on, something’s going unspoken in certain insider coverage of the campaign (and by the way this rumor the LA Times is supposedly sitting on is one I never heard in this specific form before. By the way, t’s not the Edwards rumor, it’s something else.

    And when my source said “everyone in Washington”, knows about it he means everyone in the elite Mainstream media, not just the LA Times, but everyone regularly writing about the Presdidential campaign knows about it and doesn’t know what to do with it. And I must admit it really is was juicy if true. But I don’t know if it’s true and I can’t decide if I think it’s relevant. But the fact that “everyone” in the elite media knew about it and was keeping silent about it, is, itself, news. But you can’t report the “news” without reporting the thing itself. Troubling!

    It raises all sorts of ethical questions. What about private sexual behavior is relevant? What about a marriage belongs in the coverage of a presidential campaign? Does it go to the judgment of the candidate in question? Didn’t we all have a national nervous breakdown over these questions nearly a decade ago?

    Now, as I say it’s a rumor; I haven’t seen the supporting evidence. But the person who told me said it offhandedly as if everyone in his world knew about it. And if you look close enough you can find hints of something impending, something potentially derailing to this candidate in the reporting of the campaign. Which could mean that something unspoken, unwritten about is influencing what is written, what we read.

    Why are well wired media elite keeping silent about it? Because they think we can’t handle the truth? Because they think it’s substantively irrelevant? What standards of judgment are they using? Are they afraid that to print it will bring on opprobrium. Are they afraid not printing it will bring on opprobrium? Or both?

    But alas if it leaks out from less “responsible” sources. then all their contextual protectiveness of us will have been wasted.

    And what about timing? They, meaning the DC elite media, must know if it comes out before the parties select their primary winners and eventual nominees, voters would have the ability to decide how important they felt it to the narrative of the candidate in question. Aren’t they, in delaying and not letting the pieces fall where they potentially may, not refusing to act but acting in a different way—taking it upon themselves to decide the Presidential election by their silence?

    If they waited until the nominees were chosen wouldn’t that be unfair because, arguably, it could sink the candidacy of one of the potential nominees after the nomination was finalized? And doesn’t the fact that they “all” know something’s there but can’t say affect their campaign coverage in a subterranean, subconscious way that their readers are excluded from?

    I just don’t know the answer. I’m glad in a situation like this, if there is in fact truth to it, that I wouldn’t have to be the “decider”. I wouldn’t want to be in a position of having to make that choice. But it’s a choice that may well decide a crucial turning point in history. Or maybe not: Maybe voters will decide they don’t think it’s important, however juicy. But should it be their choice or the choice of the media elites? It illustrates the fact that there are still two cultures at war within our political culture, insiders and outsiders. As a relative outsider I have to admit I was shocked not just by this but by several other things “everyone” down there knows.

    There seem to be two conflicting imperatives here. The new media, Web 2.0 anti-elitist preference for transparency and immediacy and the traditional elitist preference for reflection, judgment and standards—their reflection, their small-group judgment and standards. Their civic duty to “protect” us from knowing too much.

    I feel a little uneasy reporting this. No matter how well “nailed” they think they have it, it may turn out to be untrue. What I’m really reporting on is the unreported persistence of a schism between the DC media elites and their inside knowlede and the public that is kept in the dark. For their own good? Maybe they’d dismiss it as irrelevant, but shouldn’t they know?

    I don’t know.
    [/QUOTE]

    If the media is sitting on the story, it obviously means it's a Democrat.

  2. #2
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    8,312
    My boss's brother works for the L.A.T., and gave the scoop. It's a Hillary menage-a-trois with Rosie O'Donnel and Andrea Dworkin. I saw the photos, but am now recovering from self-inflicted white-hot pokers being jammed into my eyeballs.

  3. #3
    [QUOTE=DeanPatsFan;2186959]Involving a leading Presidential candidate.

    [url]http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/ronrosenbaum/2007/10/29/shocking_inside_dc_scandal_rum.php[/url]



    If the media is sitting on the story, it obviously means it's a Democrat.[/QUOTE]

    Or maybe, just maybe, it means they don't have enough to prove it happened yet. Imagine that, holding off on printing damaging information until you have evidence it is actually true.

  4. #4
    most who follow politics knows it is john "ambulence and now skirt chaser" edwards.

    [url]http://wonkette.com/politics/possible-sex-scandal-dept'/did-john-edwards-sleep-with-this-lady-309751.php[/url]

    with that being said, if this were a republian candidate, it would be front page news and there would be no holding back whatsoever.
    Last edited by mallamalla; 10-31-2007 at 02:40 PM.

  5. #5
    That had to hurt!

    [quote=shakin318;2187012]My boss's brother works for the L.A.T., and gave the scoop. It's a Hillary menage-a-trois with Rosie O'Donnel and Andrea Dworkin. I saw the photos, but am now recovering from self-inflicted white-hot pokers being jammed into my eyeballs.[/quote]

  6. #6
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    8,312
    [QUOTE=nuu faaola;2187024]Or maybe, just maybe, it means they don't have enough to prove it happened yet. Imagine that, holding off on printing damaging information until you have evidence it is actually true.[/QUOTE]

    [B][SIZE="4"]HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!![/SIZE][/B]

    Good one.

  7. #7
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=mallamalla;2187025]most who follow politics knows it is john "ambulence and now skirt chaser" edwards.

    [url]http://wonkette.com/politics/possible-sex-scandal-dept'/did-john-edwards-sleep-with-this-lady-309751.php[/url]

    with that being said, if this were a republian candidate, it would be front page news and there would be no holding back whatsoever.[/QUOTE]

    funny...I posted a thread about this very same thing a while back (Edwards shaggiing someone else then his cancer stricken wife) and the libs on this board laughed....

    btw- it doesn't even have to be a Republican president.....rat wing mouthpieces like msnbc were running with the "Rove will be indicted" story less than 24 hours after it appeared on a lunatic leftist site...

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;2187102]funny...I posted a thread about this very same thing a while back (Edwards shaggiing someone else then his cancer stricken wife) and the libs on this board laughed....

    [B]btw- it doesn't even have to be a Republican president.....rat wing mouthpieces like msnbc were running with the "Rove will be indicted" story less than 24 hours after it appeared on a lunatic leftist site[/B]...[/QUOTE]

    Good point. If only media restraint was the same on both sides of the political spectrum.

  9. #9
    [QUOTE=DeanPatsFan;2186959]Involving a leading Presidential candidate.

    [url]http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/ronrosenbaum/2007/10/29/shocking_inside_dc_scandal_rum.php[/url]



    If the media is sitting on the story, it obviously means it's a Democrat.[/QUOTE]Bullseye.. :yes: I'd go so far as to say it's one of the MSM's two favorites, either of which they'd love to see become president; the black guy or the woman..

  10. #10
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ (Jets Stadium Section 246)
    Posts
    36,600
    Everyone knows it inside the beltway but it hasn't leaked yet? Yeah.....sure.....secrets like that are kept!

  11. #11

    Fair and Balanced

    [QUOTE=mallamalla;2187025]most who follow politics knows it is john "ambulence and now skirt chaser" edwards.

    [url]http://wonkette.com/politics/possible-sex-scandal-dept'/did-john-edwards-sleep-with-this-lady-309751.php[/url]

    with that being said, if this were a republian candidate, it would be front page news and there would be no holding back whatsoever.[/QUOTE]

    Ok, if everyone knows about it, then even the idiots at the Republican Party rag otherwise known as Fox News would be screaming it from the rooftops.

  12. #12
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;2187102]funny...I posted a thread about this very same thing a while back (Edwards shaggiing someone else then his cancer stricken wife) and the libs on this board laughed....

    ...[/QUOTE]

    You were laughed at because you posted a National Enquirer story as fact.

  13. #13
    "There are scandals that need to be addressed. Republicans address them, Democrats re-elect them." - Tom Delay

  14. #14
    [QUOTE=mallamalla;2187192]"There are scandals that need to be addressed. Republicans address them, Democrats re-elect them." - Tom Delay[/QUOTE]

    I assume attributing this quote to Tom Delay, arguably the most scandal-plagued member of the most scandal plagued congress, is some sort of a joke, right?

  15. #15
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=nuu faaola;2187175]You were laughed at because you posted a National Enquirer story as fact.[/QUOTE]

    looks like, once again- the jokes on rat-wingers....

  16. #16
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;2187200]looks like, once again- the jokes on rat-wingers....[/QUOTE]

    And why does it look like that?

  17. #17
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=nuu faaola;2187196]I assume attributing this quote to Tom Delay, arguably the most scandal-plagued member of the most scandal plagued congress, is some sort of a joke, right?[/QUOTE]

    the sad thing it's true....while dirtbags like Foley and Craig are forced out of their positions rat-wingers are re-electing and putting people like William Jefferson on senate committee's....

    that's the real joke....

  18. #18
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;2187102]funny...I posted a thread about this very same thing a while back (Edwards shaggiing someone else then his cancer stricken wife) and the libs on this board laughed....

    btw- it doesn't even have to be a Republican president.....rat wing mouthpieces like msnbc were running with the "Rove will be indicted" story less than 24 hours after it appeared on a lunatic leftist site...[/QUOTE]

    It does say in the article that it's not the Edwards rumor.

    I just remembered something I was told by college roomates of mine (both poly sci majors) after they had gotten back from a small class which had just had a very powerful guest speaker. They did say something to me that shocked me and this article just brought that back into my mind...

  19. #19
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY;2187203]the sad thing it's true....while dirtbags like Foley and Craig are forced out of their positions rat-wingers are re-electing and putting people like William Jefferson on senate committee's....

    that's the real joke....[/QUOTE]

    "But Edwards isn't being a hypocrite, so it's OK"-
    -liberal spin, 11/07

  20. #20
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=SINYJets;2187206]It does say in the article that it's not the Edwards rumor.

    I just remembered something I was told by college roomates of mine (both poly sci majors) after they had gotten back from a small class which had just had a very powerful guest speaker. They did say something to me that shocked me and this article just brought that back into my mind...[/QUOTE]

    and that was????

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us