August
11The John Edwards Affair = Problems in the Playpen
The John Edwards affair underscores an ominous question: Is hanky panky a thing of the past?
Washington, like Hollywood, has always staked out its own special playpen, sealed off from media scrutiny. Indeed, they’ve often played together (who was it who said that “politics is just Hollywood for ugly people?”)
Jack Kennedy had his friends in Hollywood who saw to it that his evenings were happily occupied.
Even Henry Kissinger, during his moment of stardom, had showbiz pals who made sure that he was never bored in town. John McCain also has celebrity friends in Hollywood, but I can’t verify whether their interaction was ever as lively.
During the Kennedy era, there was an unwritten code that the media never wrote about the boys and their toys. With an occasional exception, the code also covered the major stars.
But now what passes for “the media” has been fragmented into warring factions of bloggers, supermarket tabloids, TV gossip mongers and assorted mischief-makers and there’s no code anymore.
Indeed, some of the editors of the New York Times are flagellating themselves for failing to pick up on the Edwards story. “I’m not going to recycle a supermarket tabloids anonymously sourced story,” huffed Bill Keller, the executive editor. But Clark Hoyt, the Times public editor, wrote Sunday that, “I think it was a mistake for the Times editors to turn up their noses and not pursue it.”
The problem is that every once in a while one of the tabloid stories is correct while others are simply bizarre. The tabs have been declaring for weeks that President Bush and his wife will split up post election, that Laura is even trying to buy a house for herself. The upmarket press has not followed up on this story.
Some folks have taken the moral high ground on all this and said that publication of the Edwards scandal is actually healthy. We must hold our leaders to a higher standard, they argue, and the press must lead the charge.
I acknowledge the logic of this position, but it still gives me a chill. Power, after all, is the ultimate aphrodisiac. Which leaders in the history of the world have led a totally pure, monastic existence?
So maybe the appropriate message is: Be careful, boys. And, for god’s sake, if you’re caught, own up to it.
Whether it’s Bubba or Edwards, pious denials are getting old.
Washington, like Hollywood, has always staked out its own special playpen, sealed off from media scrutiny. Indeed, they’ve often played together (who was it who said that “politics is just Hollywood for ugly people?”)
Jack Kennedy had his friends in Hollywood who saw to it that his evenings were happily occupied.
Even Henry Kissinger, during his moment of stardom, had showbiz pals who made sure that he was never bored in town. John McCain also has celebrity friends in Hollywood, but I can’t verify whether their interaction was ever as lively.During the Kennedy era, there was an unwritten code that the media never wrote about the boys and their toys. With an occasional exception, the code also covered the major stars.
But now what passes for “the media” has been fragmented into warring factions of bloggers, supermarket tabloids, TV gossip mongers and assorted mischief-makers and there’s no code anymore.
Indeed, some of the editors of the New York Times are flagellating themselves for failing to pick up on the Edwards story. “I’m not going to recycle a supermarket tabloids anonymously sourced story,” huffed Bill Keller, the executive editor. But Clark Hoyt, the Times public editor, wrote Sunday that, “I think it was a mistake for the Times editors to turn up their noses and not pursue it.”
The problem is that every once in a while one of the tabloid stories is correct while others are simply bizarre. The tabs have been declaring for weeks that President Bush and his wife will split up post election, that Laura is even trying to buy a house for herself. The upmarket press has not followed up on this story.
Some folks have taken the moral high ground on all this and said that publication of the Edwards scandal is actually healthy. We must hold our leaders to a higher standard, they argue, and the press must lead the charge.
I acknowledge the logic of this position, but it still gives me a chill. Power, after all, is the ultimate aphrodisiac. Which leaders in the history of the world have led a totally pure, monastic existence?
So maybe the appropriate message is: Be careful, boys. And, for god’s sake, if you’re caught, own up to it.
Whether it’s Bubba or Edwards, pious denials are getting old.
Subscribe to Peter Bart's Blog Feed
Peter seems to be saying character is irrelevant. So Hollywood, wouldn't you say?
Posted by: Banjo | 8/14/2008 3:14:07 PM
Dear Dan Zee: I seem to recall that there was plenty in the news about Clinton's infidelities and he won the election anyway. What should the media have reported then that they didn't? Also, back in 1992, after the spate of stories about Clinton's affairs there were plenty of rumors that George H.W. Bush had a mistress. Those rumors even found there way into print, I believe, but they were not picked up by what is now called the mainstream media. They let that story alone for the same reason they waited on the Edwards story: not enough sourcing. (The rumor was that Papa Bush's mistress was a state dept. employee and she'd been posted overseas to put her out of reach of reporters.) Personally, I'm glad they handled it that way.
As for the idea of finding "decent people" to run for office, I think if you run through the list of U.S. Presidents since 1960, the most "decent," by many standards, would be (in no particular order( Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush. Kennedy was a womanizer. Johnson too, and he used his office to feather his nest. Nixon committed felonies in the Oval Office. Reagan was divorced, an unenthusiastic churchgoer and a stranger to some of his grandchildren. Clinton, well, we know about Clinton. George W. Bush was an alcoholic playboy as a young man, when he was "young and irresponsible."
Ford was never elected, Carter and Bush the elder served one term each. That tells us something about the importance of "decency" to the success of our presidents.
Posted by: eyescribe | 8/12/2008 9:41:20 PM
Well, I think it was a lot more than just the mainstream media looking down their noses at the tabloid press. The story came from the National Enquirer, which has a history of doing real, honest-to-god news reporting. And the evidence was pretty clear. They had pictures of Edwards at the hotel, and then trying to dodge the reporter. This wasn't Photoshopped pictures of aliens shaking hands with the President, as in Weekly World News. It was solid facts. The mainstream press ignored it because most of the reporters are in bed with the Democrats and they like Edwards. Just like the way they played down the fact that this guy made his money as a slick trial lawyer fleecing the silicone implant industry out of hundreds of millions of dollars, claiming implants caused all sorts of diseases. Those same implants are being used today because the FDA found no proof they cause any illness. The media also ignored the hypocrisy of him going around during his campaign trying to identify with the common man while he himself is worth $100 million and lives in a giant mansion on a huge estate. So it''s no wonder they tried to pass on the story, until it got too big to ignore. If the mainstream media did its job properly, it wouldn't let guys with shaky morals like John Edwards and Bill Clinton get as far as they did, and they would hammer politicians whose friends include domestic terrorists and racist ministers. The press should force both parties to find decent people to run for office rather than doing puff pieces that gloss over their previous indiscretions.
Posted by: Dan Zee | 8/12/2008 1:11:13 PM