Monday, July 31, 2006

On Blast

I hope the fellas over at Island Drama (link may not be safe for work) are paying attention to this story.

What do y'all think?

What if a Congresswoman was sleeping with a staffer (no pun intended) and he blogged about it to the whole internet, with larger gossip and political watchdog blogs and websites picking it up and increasing distribution. What would y'all ladies think? Would she have a case for invasion of privacy? When two consenting adults engage in an affair, who holds the copyright? Where do locker room high fives cross the line before whispered rumour becomes news, where does it become litigation?

What do y'all think?

Read all about it.

6 comments:

Dante said...

Invasion of privacy? He was there. He was part of the act. Breach of trust? Most certainly. Not an invasion of privacy.

Locker room high five stories on things that did indeed happen shouldn't end up becoming litigation, even if those stories end up turning into major news. The only way to ensure that nobody will tell on you is to not do anything worth telling on.

dadvocate said...

She should have to share the money she's making with the fellows she mislead. But privacy, I've known since before high school you can't expect that from a paramour.

patsbrother said...

I will admit I stopped reading the article halfway through. Mainly because he's suing the wrong entity and, even if he was suing the correct entity, he would fail. I suppose he's trying to piss chicklet off with attorneys' bills.

Dante, each of us are present at those events we each deem private. Your point that he was there and part of the act misses the mark. It's that she was there and that she publicized it that matters.

Had she not publicized it and the other entities reported it anyway, he would at least get his foot in the door in a suit against them. Because we don't want newspapers and other media outlets announcing dirty secrets of private citizens. We want to allow those who have been damaged in some way from invasions of privacy to be able to seek redress for those invasions. Because reporters digging through trash to report that Mr. Parsons on Avenue B uses Preparation H and suffers from erectile dysfunction fulfills none of the purposes of the freedom of speech or of the press.

But chicklet did already publish it, and media do not intrude when they merely report and re-publish what is already public. I don't know why he's suing chicklet, because chicklet's ability to blog about her personal life is likely protected by the First Amendment. But damnit, he's gonna sue somebody, so it might as well be the one who kissed-and-telled about it.

liberalandproud said...

I agree with patsbrother. RS has a right to be pissed, but no legal standing. The Beltway really is a lot like Island City. It's basically a small town where everybody knows everybody else's business. It sucks that poor RS had his inadequacies (I'm assuming) published, but he certainly isn't helping things with this suit. Poor guy probably won't get laid for a while. Then again, your average dude will probably think twice about jumping in the sack with Miss Cutler.

Patrick Armstrong said...

Are you kidding? With American popular culture putting such a high premium on celebrity for the sake of celebrity (please see: Paris Hilton), unscrupulous men will be lining up around the block to take Miss Cutler to dinner and an evening on the town.

All for the chance to have their 'prowess' mentioned online by an authority on the subject.

liberalandproud said...

I said "your average dude." My mistake for assuming the average dude has scruples ; )