Subject:
|
Re: The Guardian unworthy of toilet paper?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 7 Oct 2005 21:38:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1358 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
Hey, something just occurred to me. With your above statement in mind, would
you say that it is appropriate or inappropriate to have a citizen’s private
extramarital affair dragged through the media for months on end?
|
Appropriate? Don’t know if I use that word. Listen, most of the news churned
out by the media is pure pulp. Think Hollywood. I couldn’t care less about a
star’s private life; in fact, the less I know about it, the better for them,
because I tend to associate negatively with “stars” who use their 15 minutes of
fame to espouse their agendas.
But is it inevitable? Oh yeah. As long as someone cares about that stuff (and
there will always be those who do) there will be the papparazzi right there to
serve it up for them.
As for politicians’ private lives.... if they have committed a crime then I see
no reason to hide their shame. Perhaps a little more shame and conscience in
the first place might have avoided the incident in question.
Is it the job of the media to seek out those stories? I don’t think so. But if
a wife of an adulturous senator goes to the media and wants the world to know
what a sleeze he is, who is to stop her? We make our beds, and we must lie in
them;-)
I don’t believe that merely because one is a “public figure”, one must sacrifice
privacy. These people still have rights. But it seems to me that the more one
thrusts oneself into the limelight, the more one must realize that there is a
price for that fame. For isn’t fame the very opposite of privacy?
| |
Just curious...
As opposed to “Just Curios,” a store specializing in knicknacks and
nothing but knicknacks.
|
Specialty stores are curious. I’ll never understand how a store which only sold
socks would survive
(Sox
Appeal).
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: The Guardian unworthy of toilet paper?
|
| (...) Heston should keep his mouth shut, then? (...) $40,000,000 to discover a non-crime seems a bit excessive. Other than such a criminal waste of money, I must admit I'm with you in saying I couldn't care less (the only time I care is when some (...) (19 years ago, 8-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: The Guardian unworthy of toilet paper?
|
| (...) Hey, something just occurred to me. With your above statement in mind, would you say that it is appropriate or inappropriate to have a citizen's private extramarital affair dragged through the media for months on end? Just curious... As (...) (19 years ago, 7-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
31 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
