Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I'm sure everyone has heard of this by now, but to recap, Anthony Weiner, a politician, engaged in consensual e-sex, and people found out.



http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/06/07/weiner/index.html

Greenwald sort of gets into it here, but covers what I think is the most relevant aspect of this "scandal" in another article:



http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/06/06/bipartisanship/index.html

(good article, worth reading as well)

**************

So, while you might have personal opinions about infidelity or the sanctity of marriage, it is very difficult to argue that this scandal does little but distract and divide people.

That it arises at a time when there is bipartisan and grass roots support for exiting Libya, against the patriot act, and in general, against the "powers that be" security and corporate state is no coincidence. Issues like this serve to remind the public which side of the fence they are on and why they shouldn't get along with the other guy (who might be just as concerned about individual rights, but supports the guy with the cock shot on his facebook)

By constantly playing up scandal, or contentious issues, like abortion and gun laws that have no chance of passing in the first place, the political elite can prevent any real challenge to their power, and the corporate media establishment never has to ask "the hand that feeds them" serious questions about serious issues.

Again, you are allowed your own opinions of Weiner and his marriage, a relationship you know nothing about, but to pretend that this is an issue of any political relevance is nonsense. Yet, it is exactly this type of nonsense that the mainstream media and political establishment want you to be concerned with, because it further entrenches their interests; the political elite rule with no question and the media feels no pressure to ask those questions.

Another politician caught being a pervert. Wonderful. Wooopeeee. Ha ha, More. More. More.


WTF ever.

Actually inimalist, you make a very good point about the distraction thing. People would rather gobble up shit like this than have to deal with what really matters.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
Actually inimalist, you make a very good point about the distraction thing. People would rather gobble up shit like this than have to deal with what really matters.

just to be clear, this last issue is the point of this thread, not the discussion of people's private sex lives

I, for one, couldn't care less about someone texting pictures of their penis to someone else, especially if they are consensual adults. This is behaviour we all partake in, and is hardly "perverted"

I agree. The only negative thing i see here was his lying. There is no reason he should resign over this and i support him.

Sex sells, so it is on tv all the time. I don't know if it's a "distraction" or something viewers were already asking for.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I agree. The only negative thing i see here was his lying. There is no reason he should resign over this and i support him.

I understand what you are saying, I just... I'm not even sure I think there is something to "support" here, you know? like what, I support the rights of adults to have private lives?

Originally posted by King Kandy
Sex sells, so it is on tv all the time. I don't know if it's a "distraction" or something viewers were already asking for.

well, if that is the case, it raises a pretty fundamental question about journalism: is the role of the media to provide people with the gossip stories that might titillate them? or are they supposed to provide a more fundamental service to society?

deliberate or not, this type of "news" doesn't do much to unite people around issues that actually matter, or to provoke/inform the public about the political landscape

Aww....Weiner...c'mon...

Well, most news on TV is gossip news. I don't think it is supposed to take the place of actual political news. in the new york times, this had 1 front page article... but all the others were high interest to me. I don't think it is distracting anyone, anyone who is actually interested in politics will slide past while people who only care about celebrities will have something a little different for once.

I think that the situation was aggravated because his name is Weiner. It just seemed like too great of a story to pass up.

But he lied...he lied so much

I love that guy cry

Originally posted by King Kandy
Well, most news on TV is gossip news. I don't think it is supposed to take the place of actual political news. in the new york times, this had 1 front page article... but all the others were high interest to me. I don't think it is distracting anyone, anyone who is actually interested in politics will slide past while people who only care about celebrities will have something a little different for once.

I think that the situation was aggravated because his name is Weiner. It just seemed like too great of a story to pass up.

unfortunately, these "people who are actually interested in politics" make up a small minority of the voting public, if you are defining people who are interested in politics as those who aren't interested in these types of scandals.

to the rest of the "uninformed rabble", who may have similar concerns about medicare reform, or foreign wars, this is a distraction. imho its the same reason we saw a flurry of abortion bills, with no chance of passing, introduced in various states at the same time bipartisan support against the banks and tax cuts on for the rich started to swell at a grass roots level. As soon as people start to bridge partisan lines to challenge the elite, fluff issues come up and the media is more than happy to oblige.

Originally posted by inimalist
unfortunately, these "people who are actually interested in politics" make up a small minority of the voting public, if you are defining people who are interested in politics as those who aren't interested in these types of scandals.

to the rest of the "uninformed rabble", who may have similar concerns about medicare reform, or foreign wars, this is a distraction. imho its the same reason we saw a flurry of abortion bills, with no chance of passing, introduced in various states at the same time bipartisan support against the banks and tax cuts on for the rich started to swell at a grass roots level. As soon as people start to bridge partisan lines to challenge the elite, fluff issues come up and the media is more than happy to oblige.
Are you saying that he had an affair, because politics were getting tense for the elite? I think this would have gotten big media play, regardless of when it occured.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Are you saying that he had an affair, because politics were getting tense for the elite? I think this would have gotten big media play, regardless of when it occured.

in this case, it is more that the media is more interested in presenting these types of fluff stories, because it excites people with the taboo of... consensual adult sexual activity... but even more so because they can now get ratings without ever having to ask real questions to the politicians (which is generally not good for their careers).

For instance, I'm sure Weiner is happier answering no brainer questions about his sex life than digging questions about his relationship with AIPAC and the Israeli lobby.

I don't think the media is responsible for anything really, it merely just does what is easiest, and the "left/right", scandal based reporting of trivial details of people's lives is far easier than burning their political capital trying to do real investigative reporting, and in the end, probably gets better ratings.

The elite are just happy to play along because it serves their purposes. During this whole affair, the only person I heard say (outside of the John Stewarts and Glenn Greenwalds) "lets talk about something serious" was Weiner himself. Everyone else gladly played along, because its better than the GOP or democratic leaders having to answer what were calls to end the war in Libya from within their own parties, or to take a serious look at medicare reform in line with what the American people want, rather than corporate interests (which look like they will win out again, as Obama has said entitlements will be on the table for budget negotiations).

I'm not accusing people of manufacturing the news, I'm accusing them of making the least-important-but-most-divisive stories with the simplest narratives headlines, which tacitly supports the political establishment of both parties, because such stories and continuous scandals keep any pressure off, say, the fact that the democratic party, who 5 years ago pretended to care about civil liberties, just extended the very patriot act they, 5 years ago, rallied against.

Like I said, sex sells. Haha, civil liberties don't. Its a sad state of affairs.

for sure, but like, the "profit motive" is probably not the model we should be encouraging for the thing that is supposed to inform the public about politics and act as a balance against the "powers that be".

Well that's what necessarily is, since media is delivered by private companies. Likewise, state sponsored television also has its strengths and weaknesses. I like independent journalists but often the quality is not as high.

a media outlet doesn't need to be driven by the profit motive to be successful, imho. you just need people who love the idea of being "newsmen". and regardless, we need a media that doesn't just pander to the same low brow sensibilities that sitcoms do, profitable or not.

tbh, it's more a matter of journalists being unwilling to engage the politicians about serious issues more than people not wanting to know. I genuinely believe that real discussion about real issues would attract ratings, just the anchors don't want to be ostracized from the Washington "club", so they pitch soft ones to their guests.

hell, the prime example is the daily show or Colbert, but even shows like Conan do political stuff, and TYT is apparently huge in terms of internet news. or of course, AJE. I don't think it is a matter of money at all, but like some kind of nearly inscestous pseudo-cronyism.

The Young Turks has put out many stories about Weiner...

sure, nothing is perfect, TYT has lots of problems, like Cenk being too full of himself. in their defense, TYT has always had a mix of real and pop news, but point taken, they might not have been the best example.

greenwald did the story on weiner above, AJE has their biases, Stewart is a comedy program, etc. those were more examples of news agencies that are able to be successful without pandering to scandal and other "non news" issues

But, what would you say is the way it should be? Should they be state run? Volunteerism? Should it be set up like a wikipedia-inspired system?

like I pointed out above, there are ways to do it even in the current system, so long as the people running the news program/channel are interested in producing good media, rather than competing for ratings or being afraid to go after politicians

Think of the children!! Won't someone please think of the children!

Originally posted by inimalist
like I pointed out above, there are ways to do it even in the current system, so long as the people running the news program/channel are interested in producing good media, rather than competing for ratings or being afraid to go after politicians
But the "good media" you mentioned, themselves have run stories on weiner. So i'd say you are totally wrong.

Wait, so Weiner lied about his account being hacked?

Yeah, he later admitted that.

It's sad when the most involved discussion I've seen about this and the real issues it raises is on an internet discussion forum on a movie-themed website. Although. In, you might be getting a tad reactionary here, because there is informed discussion in the news that doesn't sensationalize matters for the sake of ratings. It's just a bit harder to find.

I came home today and my mom was watching "E" or whatever it's called (the gossip show) and Weiner got the main headlines. My mom's not dumb, but she'll listen to that fluff in the background while doing other things and scoff instead of burdening her day with becoming invested in more heavy political matters. It's a time issue, politics isn't something she can afford to be interested in. So I feel like "sex sells" isn't entirely the story, nor is "people don't care." It's just the fact that easily-digested stories are going to be consumed by more people due to the necessities of our lives. So the fluff does sell better, just not exclusively for lopsidedly banal reasons.

Inimalist, that's a whole lot of words we can boil down to none of our business and who gives a shit? It was certainly stupid of him and perhaps in poor taste, but not illegal or contrary to his role as a congressman.

It's just amazing to me that any one sees stupid, irrelevant shit like this and then wonders why the amazingly innocent-seeming Mr. Boner was appointed as majority leader.

Nothing wrong with Bill Clinton getting a hummer in the oval office, nothing wrong with John Edwards cheating on his cancer-ridden wife, nothing wrong with Mr. Weiner getting his weiner on. Yeah, Mr. Edwards using campaign funds was wrong, but it's too bad that his perspective on the poor was more important to the effort than the hollow outrage over pinning him. As long as people keep in min that any sex scandle has more to do with a politician's position on unpopular issues than it does with where they stick their dick, some honest perspective can be maintained.

That having been said, I can't wait for a female politician sex scandal. You know, some soccer mom getting pounded from behind while doing a line and getting punched in the kidneys and shooting a wolf from a helicopter.

We all know they've happened, we just aren't evolved enough to accept that women get bored with marriage too.

I think when people come to realize how similar male and female sexualities really are, it will be a sign of great progress in society.

The only negative thing i see here was his lying. There is no reason he should resign over this and i support him.

People don't want to know whats really going on, they'd much prefer it to get involved in some sex scandal then to debate the current affairs.

As you said, a distraction.

Honestly, does it matter? If not for his position, this "scandal" wouldn't be relevant, and it's not like it affects his professional life. Hell, it's not even illegal

Originally posted by Lestov16
Honestly, does it matter? If not for his position, this "scandal" wouldn't be relevant, and it's not like it affects his professional life. Hell, it's not even illegal

See, I find that interesting because unlike liberal scandals, most conservative sex scandals actually do involve criminal activity. Typically bribery, extortion, rape, child pornography, child rape, and distribution of child pornography.

They don't even report the really creepy ones like Don Haidl on the national news.

I just don't see any wrongdoing here. He didn't say anything about it? Duh. It's his personal life. He is allowed to have one.

Well the big scandal that's coming out here is that Darrel Issa and government resources may have been used to expose Weiner. That would be improper and illegal.

I will tell you one thing though, Weiner should have more meticulous with his sexting. He should have known that you do NOT want to be caught in a sex scandal when you have that particular last name.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Think of the children!! Won't someone please think of the children!

Hah, exactly. Everyone has to be a role model.

I could care less about the "omg sexting!" part of it, and only think Weiners slime for admitting he didn't even know the ages of the women involved. Not to mention he's a married man.. Yeah, it's not having sex, but still..

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
Another politician caught being a pervert. Wonderful. Wooopeeee. Ha ha, More. More. More.


WTF ever.

Actually inimalist, you make a very good point about the distraction thing. People would rather gobble up shit like this than have to deal with what really matters.

There is nothing new with that happening.

Originally posted by cdtm
Hah, exactly. Everyone has to be a role model.

I could care less about the "omg sexting!" part of it, and only think Weiners slime for admitting he didn't even know the ages of the women involved. Not to mention he's a married man.. Yeah, it's not having sex, but still.. But you should be concerned about the House Oversight committee and its resources potentially being used for a politically motivated expose where no wrongdoing has occurred. It kind of smells of the whole Jack Ryan thing where the media and Obama's operatives did the same improper thing to a Republican (see, I can be fair).

Originally posted by skekUng

That having been said, I can't wait for a female politician sex scandal. You know, some soccer mom getting pounded from behind while doing a line and getting punched in the kidneys and shooting a wolf from a helicopter.

If Palin can do all that at the same time, she's got my vote.

Female sex scandal?

Ok-

Helen Chenoweth, Congresswoman (R-Id.). Admitted to a six-year adulterous affair with a married associate. In 1995, Chenoweth had denied the affair when asked about it by The Spokane Spokesman-Review, but now she claims a pardon from a higher authority: "I've asked for God's forgiveness, and I've received it," she revealed.

Sue Myrick, Congresswoman (R-NC), describes herself as a "devout Christian." Committed adultery with a married man.

Jean Schmidt, OH-2, though not herself implicated, employed a campaign manager (Joe Braun) in her 2005 election who once wrote an article condemning gay men for running sex ad profiles, and who was then accused of running his own sex profile on Collarme, an S&M sex site. The profile called for "submissives" to wear only a collar and handcuffs and to have hot wax dripped on them.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Jean Schmidt, OH-2, though not herself implicated, employed a campaign manager (Joe Braun) in her 2005 election who once wrote an article condemning gay men for running sex ad profiles, and who was then accused of running his own sex profile on Collarme, an S&M sex site. The profile called for "submissives" to wear only a collar and handcuffs and to have hot wax dripped on them.

From his own perspective, though, that's not hypocritical. Hetero lovin' is acceptable, even the kinky stuff.

Now, if he's married, that'd be a different story.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Think of the children!! Won't someone please think of the children!

Males think with one head... Gaurd your kids! better yet dont have any..

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Well the big scandal that's coming out here is that Darrel Issa and government resources may have been used to expose Weiner. That would be improper and illegal.

I hate the puns this entire debacle creates...well, more like I hate how immature I am for seeing them.


Originally posted by dadudemon
From his own perspective, though, that's not hypocritical. Hetero lovin' is acceptable, even the kinky stuff.

Now, if he's married, that'd be a different story.

I'd like to submit that "Jean" is a female not a male. My bad.