Gannon UpdateBrian Montopoli of Columbia Journalism Review hits the
some right notes here:
There's nothing that enrages partisans more than a hypocrite, and, in their zeal to take down an apparent first-rate one like Gannon, many liberals were blind to the ethical issues of exposing his private life. Gannon has every right to be gay and to aspire to become a pornography peddler (as some of the domain names he registered suggest) while serving as a GOP shill responsible for pseudo-journalism with an anti-gay undercurrent.Brian gets the privacy/ethics issue right.
Of course, most of the folks who get enraged by hypocrites are Democrat partisans; I am trying to recall the last time I accused a Democrat of hypocrisy and not coming up with anything right now. And the hypocrisy charge seems a little hard to justify.
Most of the lefty bloggers writing about the
hypocrisy issue focus
on this article. But reading it, it's hard for me to see the "anti-gay undercurrent" (ignore the snide comment at the top, which was added by the poster). This is a touchy subject, but it seems to me that one can oppose the
liberal gay agenda while being gay oneself (much as one can be black and oppose affirmative action). I remember a few months ago, Hugh Hewitt only took phone calls from gays for an hour on the subject of gay marriage. Of course, Hugh has a largely conservative audience, so they were mostly Republican gays. Almost to a man (don't recall if any women called in), they said they opposed gay marriage and supported civil unions.
Hat Tip:
Wizbang, which has a
very good post on the work of Duncan Black and Media Matters in outing Gannon.
