February 11, 2005
Who?
Doofy Dawn Summers called me yesterday while I was on the bus on my way home from work:
Dawn: Have you heard of Jeff Gannon?
Me: Jeff Cannon?
Dawn: Gannon, with a 'g'.
Me: No. Why?
Dawn: Because apparently he has a White House press pass and has ties to gay prostitution.
Me: And?
Dawn: I wonder why the blogosphere isn't celebrating another head on their mantle.
A conversation then ensued about what type of prying is inappropriate into the life of a non-elected citizen. Like I said to Dawn, liberal glee over Gannon's take-down is exactly the problem with the Democratic party: they don't get it. The point isn't to arbitrarily get dirt on reporters and ruin their lives. That's stupid, and if we go that route I have a feeling it'll be more than just newspeople who have dirty secrets to hide. The point is to hold reporters accountable for the opinions they insert into news and for opinions, like say Eason Jordan, that reveal their contempt for whole segments of the population. Gannon got into the White House using a fake name. That's the story. Gay prositution? Don't ask, don't tell.
Acey has a must, must, must click top 10 that sums up my feelings on this matter perfectly.
UPDATE: Buzzmachine has a good post on both Jordan and Gannon and writes much the same as I did:
1. What the White House did:Posted by Karol at February 11, 2005 12:39 PM | TrackBackThe argument on Media Matters and Kos and other sites has been that Gannon is a ringer put in the White House with a fake "news service" called Talon and that he only pitches softball questions and only repeats the official line. If the White House gamed the press corps in that way, that's a story.
2. What bloggers did:
The bloggers went after Gannon personally, first trying to expose his real name and then his sex life. If Gannon is part of a homophobic organization and if he is gay, then that's a story about hypocrisy. But is it a news story? I'm not comfortable with outing as news, for there was a time not long ago enough when revealing someone's homosexuality was a story and a scandal and a crime when it should not have been; to use that sort of attack by innuendo for the other side -- just because it's for the other side -- doesn't make it right. So here, too, the bloggers end up as the story.
Technorati Tags:
I agree. I think both of these "stories" reveal the dark side of the blogosphere. It is truly frightening and the sort of thing that gives blogging a black eye.
Posted by: Shawn at February 11, 2005 01:15 PM"Acey's" #3 is actually stolen from me ;)
Y'know, in case that was your favorite one.
Ari.
Posted by: Neighborgirl at February 11, 2005 01:27 PMOops - it's #7 that is mine actually.
Posted by: Neighborgirl at February 11, 2005 01:28 PMI thought #6 was good...but I'm like that.
Posted by: Shawn at February 11, 2005 01:37 PMHaahaa!!
Posted by: Neighborgirl at February 11, 2005 01:40 PMTalon News service is a real news service. It is clearly conservative, but it is not a proxy for the Whitehouse. Gannon has asked critical questions from the right and Talon and GOPUSA run editorials and letters attacking the President.
The leftist establishment media are uncomfortable and are going after any and all competition. They went after Paul Sperry of WorldNetDaily.com to prevent him from getting Congressional and White House passes.
Gannon did not get into the White House using his pseudonym. Rather, he got in with his real name and used his psuedonymn while working, after being vetted by the FBI.
As to Gannon's other work running websites, I believe that more facts will become apparent.
You're right about one thing---the gay porn angle is NOT important. A little funny, sure, in a gossiply kind of way, but not important.
It does allow you cover to sidestep the fact that White House "gamed" the press corps in much the same way it "games" the entire corporate media.
It reminds me of who right-wing bloggers used a phony racism outrage at the Rice confirmation to sidestep Dr. Rice's role in the Bush Administration's long string of blunders and lies in the fight against Al Qaeda.
Posted by: Don Myers at February 11, 2005 05:31 PMooh, nice point, Don. Exactly.
Posted by: Dawn Summers at February 11, 2005 05:56 PMDon, you might be interested in Howard Kurtz' article on the subject. He quotes Markos Zuniga, who says that he chose to use the gay sex angle to call attention to his personal vendetta against Gannon.
"If that's what it took to really bring attention to him, it's one of those unfortunate facts of reality in the way we operate today. It's sex that really draws attention to these things." That's just one quote. Read the whole article.
It might be easy to say that the sex thing SHOULDN'T be part of the story, but that doesn't change the fact that the left-wing smear team DELIBERATELY MADE IT part of the story. They took a reporter whose opinions they disagreed with and humiliated him out of the business. If conservatives worked that way, Helen Thomas would have been drummed out of the press corps years ago.
Posted by: Jeff Harrell at February 11, 2005 11:34 PMConservative bloggers have outed MSM people who lie, cheat, falsity documents, commit fraud, suppress news and make up news.
The left have outed MSM people who are gay.
Posted by: Jake at February 12, 2005 11:23 AMHelen Thomas is gay?
Posted by: ugarte at February 12, 2005 02:07 PMHelen Thomas is gay?
Her cherry's so old it has fruit flies!
Posted by: Radical Redneck at February 12, 2005 03:21 PM
