The pre-packaged, glossy images presented to the public often are the antithesis of the real people under that shiny topcoat. The men and women constructing legislation and voting on issues that affect everyone’s life in some way or another have private lives that, at times, counter exactly what they object to publicly and politically. Recent news outlets have seen a rise in gray area ethics stories. Some interesting stories have been presented about the recent case of Sen. Larry Craig and his sexual escapades in Minnesota airport bathrooms. Morals and ethics are the core of every person’s being, and politics affect every person’s life in some way. The ethical question arises after reading these stories: Is it any of our business if a politician is a closet homosexual? There seem to be five reasons why these stories are ethically sound to publish, according to Kelly McBride’s article on ethics.
The first reason why someone’s sexual orientation can be “outed” is if the person in question is a hypocrite. Because Craig publicly proclaimed the “sanctity of marriage”, he is a hypocrite. McBride says that it’s “fair game if a certain politician has consistently voted on public policy issues that appear to undermine the rights or the political agenda of gay and lesbian citizens and if there is evidence that he is gay himself.” In Craig’s case, this seems to be one of the main reasons the story was published.
The resounding reason his story came to the public’s eyes and ears seems to be the alleged, and later claimed truthful, restroom game of footsie with an undercover copper in a Minnesota airport bathroom. Under McBride’s reasons is a section on criminal behavior. “If a politician is engaged in or charged with behavior that is deemed to be against the law, then we usually care.” Here we go, Statesman; here is your “GO!!!” The case against The Statesman doesn’t seem viable considering the fact that they chose to publish their story only after Senator Craig pleaded guilty to the airport bathroom incident. Their integrity was held up at that point. They took the ethical approach of waiting until they were sure the story was accurate before publishing it.
When we talk about Senator Craig, we are dealing with a public figure that built his career “on a platform of morality and family values”, according to a Washington Post article by Howard Kurtz. Tarnishing his career would be a pleasure for some journalists. There is nothing more irritating and disappointing than a politician that hides under a veil of lies. This also happens to be one of the most predictable things for politicians to do.
Something to think about in regards to stories like these is the difference between the acceptability of infidelity in society. Would this story be newsworthy if Craig was soliciting a call girl? Probably. But, it would not be nearly as shocking. Thomas Patrick McCarthy wrote a riveting article for The Nation that questioned the hypocrisy of straight versus gay affairs. Congressman and Evangelical Reverend Ted Haggard “--named as one of the nation's "25 most influential evangelicals" in a 2005 Time cover story -- stepped down as head of his 14,000-member mega-church after a gay prostitute claimed the pastor had repeatedly solicited him for sex and drugs.”
He contrasts what happened when Louisiana Senator David Vitter who was named on the list of a “multi-million dollar escort service in Washington, DC”. Vitter has once before been accused of affairs with prostitutes. Vitter is still in office and he remains “a proud supporter of "mainstream conservative principles"’.
What does this tell society? Is it possible that one day we can live in a world where public figures, including politicians and celebrities, can live their lives and be who they are without having that glossy veil? Perhaps we must always retain that veil. Perhaps that veil is a safety net society needs. If we are going to have it, and there is no way around it, McCarthy brings to the table is the idea that “If you're going to be a hypocrite, it pays to be a straight hypocrite.” All sarcasm aside, McCarthy is making a valid point.
Sources
http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=67&aid=129197
http://www.sacbee.com/325/story/366740.html
http://www.sacbee.com/breton/story/368436.html
Kurtz, Howard. “For Idaho Paper And Reporter, Craig Story Posed a Moral Dilemma”. Washington Post. 30 August 2007
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I think that it is realistic and expected for there to be news stories about anyone being homosexual. As a society we are not even close to being accepting of gay people let alone other races. Of course this is not everywhere but even though most people I talk to are liberal and open minded(those dont always come hand in hand) there are a lot of people who cannot accept what they do not understand. I think it's unfortunate that Sen. Craige's personal life is all over the news, especially once he's done something wrong, but that is what comes with the territory of being a public figure.
I agree the Sen Craig is fair game to the public. The one area I do not get though, is that why would something like this or why should it change how we view them. I mean sometimes going there whole lives and not knowing they are gay and the when they are, we all of a sudden turn our heads away seeing them as a bad person. To a journalist, any information they find out from a person, is fair game, since it is part of what a journalist does. Now knowing about someone's personal life is not always our business and many people do not care.
Post a Comment