Krusty Konservative who now blogs for the Republican on-line information source, www.theiowarepublican.com, outs Des Moines Register political reporter, Jason Clayworth. Krusty writes that he doesn't think Clayworth, who recently announced his engagement to his partner on the social-networking site, Facebook, should be allowed to report on issues that directly affect homosexuals, like gay marriage. He also claims Clayworth supports the on-line support group on Facebook “I Support The Unanimous Iowa Supreme Court Ruling - Gay Marriage”. However, I could not find anything that links Clayworth to that group.
I'd be curious what Clayworth's bosses think if he did belong to that Facebook group. Is that appropriate? It seems many employers are becoming more and more concerned with journalists (or any employees for that matter) participation on social networking sites. Journalists at work aren't usually allowed to express opinion. Many don't want to see journalists express opinions on a social-networking site either.
If Clayworth did/does not belong to that pro-gay marriage group, then is there really a conflict here? If a reporter opposes racism, should he not be able to cover the Ku Klux Klan? Should an atheist cover a religious matter? How far should this go? What do you think?
ETC...
Chris Carpenter looked incredible for my St. Louis Cardinals. I only hope this, and his arm, can keep going.
I never knew I had any allergies. But the last two times I've been to Tampa this year, I'm getting hit by something. It has been really dry there, so pollen is extra high. I'm blaming the pollen.
"Friday Night Lights" on NBC had yet another great episode last night. It was the finale for this season, which went by way too quickly. I'm so glad the show is coming back for at least two more years. I really don't know why more people aren't watching it though. Although, I admit, it's a stretch at times to watch these actors who are pushing 30 pretend like they are still in high school.
Posts
Murphy's Law: Cyclone dud disappoints
1 day ago
7 comments:
If Clayworth announced his engagement to a man on the WORLDWIDE WEB, it's tough to say that Krusty outed him. Is it possible that Clayworth removed himself from the groups members? Obviously he's made his profile private now so there is no way to see his pictures or announcement without being his friend. People want their reporters to be objective, without hidden agendas.
Isn't that why WHO mentions Erin Kiernan's marriage to Michael? Gannett had the publisher of the Indianola paper disclose her marriage in a disclaimer in each story that covered her husband when he was a state rep.
Full Disclosure, more versus less. Isn't that what the press expects?
I agree reporters shouldn't be giving their opinions on Facebook or anywhere else. But I don't think just because someone is gay, he can't cover a story. I think all reporters have some kind of bias. If the reporter joined some type of pro-gay marriage group then I agree that's wrong. And his bosses should agree it's wrong.
Jason’s Facebook was never open to the public, only his friends.
I know, because I've known him since college and remain one of his friends in both cyberspace and in real life.
Anonymous #1 is likely the person Jason removed from his facebook who is generally believed to be Krusty. Shameful since that person is also widely known in the gay community as having received happy endings from gay men in a certain massage parlor in DuPont Circle while working for a certain Iowa Republican elected official.
Jason has been with his partner for almost a decade and has been out that entire time to friends, family and coworker. His life is not a secret.
Every reporter brings a bias. Had Jason been engaged to a woman and listed his religion as Southern Baptist (his actual religion) that would have indicated a bias as well. My point: Every reporter has personal biases.
Anon #3 You're wrong about me (anon 1). I am not Krusty, don't know Jason Clayworth, never worked for any Republican and am a life long heterosexual. Plus, Jason's profile was open on Facebook and so was his signifigant other Joe. In addition, if that's true of Krusty, that would be considered an outing.
I believe Dave was using "outing" not explicitly in its literal meaning, but rather meaning he was more or less "outed" to the general public -- who didn't know before reading Krusty's shitty lowlife article that Jason was in fact gay. And Krusty's Nick Ryan right? Why don't we out the guy who hides behind the pen name?
I seriously doubt Nick Ryan could have started a blog in February 2006 and stay successfully anonymous while running Jim Nussle's 2006 campaign for Governor.
Who says he started it? Perhaps it's not the same person running it now. Bloggers come and go.
Post a Comment