| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/05/2009 02:22:15 PM · #1 |
I'm trying to get some work done on a presentation I have to give, but I just have to get some stuff out before I can concentrate.
What's up with the media's obsession with Carrie Prejean?
For those who need the refresher, she is the Miss USA runner up who was asked by Perez Hilton during the interview portion what she thought about gay marriage. She answered basically that it was not consistent with the way she was raised while attempting some amount of bridge building with a "no offense to anybody out there".
Ever since, the media seems to have a vendetta against her.
First was the dissecting of her answer spearheaded by Perez Hilton himself. The general consensus was negative with the focus on quotes by Hilton, and Lewis (the director of the pageant). Generally this stuff wasn't that big a deal, although you would be hard pressed to find the story from any other angle. (Free speech? open debate? etc)
Then the trash starts.
Apparently it's a big deal Prejean had breast implants. Not only that, they were paid my the Miss California committee. Is this news? I have got to assume there was lots of saline and silicone parading around that night. The fact that it was paid for by the pageant is a bit interesting to me, but the articles always describe Prejean as per her marriage answer. In some of the less-than-classy blog type articles listed by Google we get quotes like, "Miss California Carrie Prejean is not just a stupid bitch who hates homos, but she's also a dumb blond with fake boobs." (www.gaysocialite.com).
I was already getting the sense there was a backlash against her, but it was only starting.
Now, importantly for you and me, we find out Prejean was in some "racy" photos taken earlier in her career. Most articles also report the "rumour" of nude photos, but none have surfaced. The picture du jour hardly rises to the level of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue. (I'll let you search it out yourself in case you don't want to do such a thing at work.)
What am I supposed to think?
I am not one of the people who bemoan the left-wing agenda of the media. My impression is there may be a mild left-leaning bias, but it hardly rises to the level of threat to anybody. NPR, for example, which I love to listen to, I believe reports their stories fairly, but do have a moderate left-leaning selection of WHICH stories to run. No big deal. So while I think this conversation above is worth having, I don't want to be dismissed immediately as a conspiracy theorist harping about the "liberals".
So I guess I feel that Prejean is getting the short end of the stick, and I feel there is a good chance she is getting that short end because she has traditional, Christian ethics and was brave stupid enough to display them on national TV.
I'm open to conversation. Maybe it's not the media. Maybe it's just Google news. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 02:28:20 PM · #2 |
| You say you desire to keep this out of the left-vs-right media bias debate, but since gay marriage is a divisive issue, the reporting on it may also be perceived as divisive. In other words, trash/tabloid journalism abounds. Surely this does not surprise you. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 02:42:23 PM · #3 |
| the swine flu hysteria was dying down, and the media needed *something* to sell papers. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 02:49:17 PM · #4 |
I haven't followed this so I'll have to take your word that the media's obsession with her is unusually high. I'm not sure saying "no offense to anybody out there" and "that's how I was raised" is bridge building. Those are more like brick walls to me. She does make it easy for someone to attack her based on the last quote or perhaps she was raised to be a walking piece of plastic.
|
|
|
|
05/05/2009 02:50:53 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by citymars:
You say you desire to keep this out of the left-vs-right media bias debate, but since gay marriage is a divisive issue, the reporting on it may also be perceived as divisive. In other words, trash/tabloid journalism abounds. Surely this does not surprise you. |
I guess I'm surprised by the ad homenim attacks. Prejean's opinion is discredited because she has fake boobs and has taken some "racy" pictures.
Maybe I'm sensitive to the issue and am inputting some personal bias. That's a distinct possibility. Maybe this stuff goes on all the time, but perhaps it should be pointed out more often then so we can get beyond it. It seems to me a double standard exists because the only thing that seems to delineate Prejean from any of the other pageant contestants was her gay marriage answer. I'm assuming there are lots of fake boobs, lots of Christians (who didn't have this question), and lots of people with swimsuit-issue level photos in their past to pick from.
Message edited by author 2009-05-05 14:51:59. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 02:53:51 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by yanko:
I haven't followed this so I'll have to take your word that the media's obsession with her is unusually high. I'm not sure saying "no offense to anybody out there" and "that's how I was raised" is bridge building. Those are more like brick walls to me. She does make it easy for someone to attack her based on the last quote or perhaps she was raised to be a walking piece of plastic. |
Come on. If you have 30 seconds to answer a question on the spot, you have to give her some credit. She was acknowledging there were other opinions out there than the one she was giving. I think that's a perfect bridge builder.
As for obsession level, I'm just going by the frequency I see it on Google News and how many articles are being cited underneath. The boob job bit was 400-500 and the racy photos about the same. Certainly that doesn't raise it to the level of being on the front page of newspapers, but it does seem to be popular enough to make Google's Top 3-4 articles for whatever section that falls under.
Message edited by author 2009-05-05 14:57:16. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 02:55:01 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by citymars:
You say you desire to keep this out of the left-vs-right media bias debate, but since gay marriage is a divisive issue, the reporting on it may also be perceived as divisive. In other words, trash/tabloid journalism abounds. Surely this does not surprise you. |
I guess I'm surprised by the ad homenim attacks. Prejean's opinion is discredited because she has fake boobs and has taken some "racy" pictures.
Maybe I'm sensitive to the issue and am inputting some personal bias. That's a distinct possibility. Maybe this stuff goes on all the time, but perhaps it should be pointed out more often then so we can get beyond it. It seems to me a double standard exists because the only thing that seems to delineate Prejean from any of the other pageant contestants was her gay marriage answer. I'm assuming there are lots of fake boobs, lots of Christians (who didn't have this question), and lots of people with swimsuit-issue level photos in their past to pick from. |
Yes this stuff goes on all the time. And there IS something that distinguishes her from all the others in the pageant: she won! That's why there's a target on her, not on the others. Not saying that's right, it just *is*; that's the state of journalism right now :-(
R. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 02:56:34 PM · #8 |
I disagree that its a collateral attack on her. She is a hypocrite to pass judgment on others and hide behind her religion while having her own set of skeletons that do offend the faith she claims tells her that "gay marriage isn't right"
eta: I don't really want to participate on this thread, but I find it fascinating and a bit vexing that you carry on stirring up these debates that clearly cannot be resolved here. Minds don't even get changed here so why use this photo forum to keep doing this?
Message edited by author 2009-05-05 14:58:17. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 02:57:43 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Yes this stuff goes on all the time. And there IS something that distinguishes her from all the others in the pageant: she won! That's why there's a target on her, not on the others. Not saying that's right, it just *is*; that's the state of journalism right now :-(
R. |
Actually she came in 2nd. I haven't heard boo about the winner. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:02:22 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by frisca:
I disagree that its a collateral attack on her. She is a hypocrite to pass judgment on others and hide behind her religion while having her own set of skeletons that do offend the faith she claims tells her that "gay marriage isn't right"
eta: I don't really want to participate on this thread, but I find it fascinating and a bit vexing that you carry on stirring up these debates that clearly cannot be resolved here. Minds don't even get changed here so why use this photo forum to keep doing this? |
I like to have conversations. I certainly don't want to get into the gay marriage thing again. This should be viewed as a tangential discussion.
I do think you hit the nail on the head. But hypocricy exists everywhere. Does the media have an extra beef against Christian hypocrites? Maybe? I dunno. But's what's hypocritical? Fake boobs? Probably not. Maybe the whole pageant thing period. I actually do have some questions about that, but I was trying to take the "to each their own" position. It would actually be an interesting article to look at religion and pageants like this. Again, though, I'm assuming Prejean was far from the only self-professed Christian on the stage. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:05:32 PM · #11 |
I think you simply have to look at context.
It's a changing world.
A few years ago, if a Pageant contestant had bravelystupidly stood up for gay rights, THEY would have been railroaded.
Now, it's turning around. Once this gay-marriage thing has become a small blip on the radar of the past and the next big hot-topic issue is here, the media will be all over someone else for something else.
C'est la vie. Media is media.
|
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:11:01 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by yanko:
I haven't followed this so I'll have to take your word that the media's obsession with her is unusually high. I'm not sure saying "no offense to anybody out there" and "that's how I was raised" is bridge building. Those are more like brick walls to me. She does make it easy for someone to attack her based on the last quote or perhaps she was raised to be a walking piece of plastic. |
Come on. If you have 30 seconds to answer a question on the spot, you have to give her some credit. She was acknowledging there were other opinions out there than the one she was giving. I think that's a perfect bridge builder. |
Well she appears to be either insincere or terribly ignorant, neither of which makes for a particularly good bridge. What she said is no different than speaking at the NAACP saying you're against interracial marriages, but no offense...
Message edited by author 2009-05-05 15:12:01.
|
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:12:20 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
I think you simply have to look at context.
It's a changing world.
A few years ago, if a Pageant contestant had bravelystupidly stood up for gay rights, THEY would have been railroaded.
Now, it's turning around. Once this gay-marriage thing has become a small blip on the radar of the past and the next big hot-topic issue is here, the media will be all over someone else for something else.
C'est la vie. Media is media. |
Probably some truth. I remember some actual footage of TV interviews in Milk of some gal who was against homosexuality. (Was she a beauty queen too? I forget now.) Anyway, I remember thinking to myself, "WOW! She actually said that?" I could be wrong, but I'm guessing there wasn't too much backlash back then.
The perhaps more interesting question then is whether the media reflects the culture or shapes it? I bet there are more than a handful of thesis papers looking at this. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:14:26 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Well she appears to be either insincere or terribly ignorant, neither of which makes for a particularly good bridge. What she said is no different than speaking at the NAACP saying you're against interracial marriages, but no offense... |
Not a great analogy. I'm assuming Miss USA is not stocked with gay contestants. (Although that's an assumption, eh?)
I think you just don't like the answer. Let me ask this. Let's say she was PRO-gay marriage. What would be your version of a good answer that builds bridges with the other camp? |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:15:07 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
I think you simply have to look at context.
It's a changing world.
A few years ago, if a Pageant contestant had bravelystupidly stood up for gay rights, THEY would have been railroaded.
Now, it's turning around. Once this gay-marriage thing has become a small blip on the radar of the past and the next big hot-topic issue is here, the media will be all over someone else for something else.
C'est la vie. Media is media. |
Probably some truth. I remember some actual footage of TV interviews in Milk of some gal who was against homosexuality. (Was she a beauty queen too? I forget now.) Anyway, I remember thinking to myself, "WOW! She actually said that?" I could be wrong, but I'm guessing there wasn't too much backlash back then.
The perhaps more interesting question then is whether the media reflects the culture or shapes it? I bet there are more than a handful of thesis papers looking at this. |
This isn't an either/or statement. It contributes to both, without a doubt. The more ignorant and unlearned the person being exposed to the media, the more it will shape them, but it also reflects those with more knowledge and learning.
There is also the unfortunate charisma variable, which can be brought forth by both the knowledgeable, AND the ignorant, and it is one of the things that throws a monkey wrench into the whole aspect. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:22:02 PM · #16 |
I don't know a huge amount about Miss Prejean, but I think that the story is not really the left wing conspiracy that you imply.
Stories about beauty queens have always been popular. Usually there is the opportunity to show some mildly titilating images under the banner of mock outrage (but actually to sell some papers/airtime). Plus she managed to make the statement in a Youtube enabled world.
The stories in question also throw up a number of hypocrises. In all of these, bear in mind that Carrie Prejean is being held out as being an aspirational public figure.
Cosmetic surgery: there is something wrong about a girl winning (or nearly winning) a competition through the use of cosmetic surgery, and even worse for competition organisers to arrange for its contestants to be enhanced. I am sure that the Olympics would feature more impressive athletic feats if the organisers arranged for everyone to be given performance enhancing drugs, but that is not a good reason to do it.
Racy photos: there is a contrast between her projected and self-professed wholesome persona and the existence of nude photographs. They might expose her to disqualification.
Gay marriage: her hard-line comments conflict somewhat with the sentiments traditionally expressed at these events, which are generally caring, inclusive and non-political or soft-political. Her comments were ill-advised, offensive to people including the judge, and (like it or not) indicative of the religiously-originated bigotry that makes life difficult for gay people. In these respects, her comments were unusual and (given our celebrity obsessed media) newsworthy.
|
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:31:07 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by yanko:
Well she appears to be either insincere or terribly ignorant, neither of which makes for a particularly good bridge. What she said is no different than speaking at the NAACP saying you're against interracial marriages, but no offense... |
Not a great analogy. I'm assuming Miss USA is not stocked with gay contestants. (Although that's an assumption, eh?)
|
I don't know about the contestants. I was thinking of everyone else associated with the pageant, the hairdresses, the makeup artists, the people in the audience, the fans of this stuff, etc, etc.
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I think you just don't like the answer. Let me ask this. Let's say she was PRO-gay marriage. What would be your version of a good answer that builds bridges with the other camp? |
Well I'm sure you probably already know this but I don't like any answer that ends with that's just how I was raised. A good answer would have been one that she came up with herself.
|
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:33:56 PM · #18 |
I don't think your wrong, Matthew (although you didn't apparently see my "I don't want to be dismissed immediately as a conspiracy theorist harping about the "liberals"." line), but it seems to be a matter of scope. I agree wholeheartedly about your cosmetic surgery bit. It seems quite antithetical to a pageant to have augmentation, but why not approach the story from that angle? Why even mention Prejean's gay marriage answer then? I'm guessing there are few, if any, articles about the implants that do not mention the interview.
As far as the photo goes, you'll have to look at it. It is nothing. Like I said, SI Swimsuit regularly passes this by in terms of "racy".
Message edited by author 2009-05-05 15:34:52. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:45:20 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by yanko:
I don't know about the contestants. I was thinking of everyone else associated with the pageant, the hairdresses, the makeup artists, the people in the audience, the fans of this stuff, etc, etc. |
I'm guessing it's a lost art form presenting a contrary opinion to a crowd. How do you support stem cell research in front of the Vatican? Clean energy to the coal mining union? and do so with poise, grace, and bridge building? Most of our politicians don't know how to do it. They know the art of the "non-answer". I think Obama is pretty good at this. Maybe it was too much to expect from a beauty queen contestant.
Message edited by author 2009-05-05 15:51:00. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:49:38 PM · #20 |
How about a simple, "While I'm opposed to the idea because of my upbringing and faith, I also realize I don't have all the answers or research on the subject, which I am certainly willing to keep an open mind on in the future."
Ok, maybe that's not so simple ;D |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:50:19 PM · #21 |
I don't think it's just about her comments in the pageant, but more about her decision since to use her position as Miss California to crusade against gay marriage, joining with NOM for an ad campaign. When she publicly takes a controversial stand she should expect controversy, including pointing out her own hypocrisy.
Message edited by author 2009-05-05 15:53:09. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:50:43 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Yes this stuff goes on all the time. And there IS something that distinguishes her from all the others in the pageant: she won! That's why there's a target on her, not on the others. Not saying that's right, it just *is*; that's the state of journalism right now :-(
R. |
Actually she came in 2nd. I haven't heard boo about the winner. |
Oh, yeah? Shows how distorted things get, doesn't it? So much attention on her, I thought she won.
R. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:52:08 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Again, though, I'm assuming Prejean was far from the only self-professed Christian on the stage. |
Out of curiosity, what kind of Christian IS there other than "self-professed"?
R. |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:54:11 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by BeeCee:
I don't think it's just about her comments in the pageant, but more about her decision since to use her position as Miss California to crusade against gay marriage. When she publicly takes a controversial stand she should expect controversy, including pointing out her own hypocrisy. |
Good possible point. This seems a chicken and egg thing. I do note she has gone on the offensive and is advocating her position. That probably encourages some stuff.
Would you consider a pro-gay marriage position to be controversial also? And I'm still unclear on exactly what the hypocrisy is. Is it the breast implants or the swimsuit level photo? |
|
|
|
05/05/2009 03:54:49 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by BeeCee:
I don't think it's just about her comments in the pageant, but more about her decision since to use her position as Miss California to crusade against gay marriage, joining with NOM for an ad campaign. When she publicly takes a controversial stand she should expect controversy, including pointing out her own hypocrisy. |
My understanding is that this was simply an answer to an interview question. Was this her "her cause" (or platform) that she would be "crusading" (to use your term) for?
Admittedly, I've not read a lot about it, so I may have missed that. |
|
