"Two sources say his cock was like a can of Campbell's soup" I talk about blowjobs a lot. I talk about being pretty darn good at them, with the licking and the cupping and other such things that make me particularly awesome at head. I do this on Twitter, and in the newspaper, and in poetry reading open mic nights, and now apparently here on the Wonkette.
Perhaps the confusion regarding what's newsworthy and what's not stems from whether the press should still be considered The Fourth Estate with a role to play in educating and informing our society. As such, one would think editors and journalists would have a responsibility to communicate those stories that add to the common good. I don't see the press under that light and I can understand why a sex tape may be considered as newsworthy. Like all porn, I say it depends on who's in it. I don't care about a video of Hulk Hogan having sex with Heather Clem. Oddly enough, I remember when Tonya Harding's sex tape came out I did want to watch that.
Part of what drove me crazy about Gawker and it's various other pages was the trolls, and the people who defended them. Best part of Wonkette is being able to enjoy a fucking conversation, and know that when the trolls DO come, they'll be ganged up on, deleted, and then mocked every Sunday!
Somebody 'splain me how knowing about Hulk Hogan's sexcapades helps me, or anyone, understand ISIS, climate change, immigration, crabgrass, or any other thing remotely of concern to any rational human being. Journalism deserves protection. Entertainment wearing a thin tattered veil labeled "journalism" does not.
It's illegal in Florida though, although I don't know how good the source is:810.145 Video voyeurismChapter 810 BURGLARY AND TRESPASS
a) “Broadcast” means electronically transmitting a visual image with the intent that it be viewed by another person.(b) “Imaging device” means any mechanical, digital, or electronic viewing device; still camera; camcorder; motion picture camera; or any other instrument, equipment, or format capable of recording, storing, or transmitting visual images of another person.(c) “Place and time when a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy” means a place and time when a reasonable person would believe that he or she could fully disrobe in privacy, without being concerned that the person’s undressing was being viewed, recorded, or broadcasted by another, including, but not limited to, the interior of a residential dwelling, bathroom, changing room, fitting room, dressing room, or tanning booth.d) “Privately exposing the body” means exposing a sexual organ.(2) A person commits the offense of video voyeurism if that person:For his or her own amusement, entertainment, sexual arousal, gratification, or profit, or for the purpose of degrading or abusing another person, intentionally uses or installs an imaging device to secretly view, broadcast, or record a person, without that person’s knowledge and consent, who is dressing, undressing, or privately exposing the body, at a place and time when that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy;(b) For the amusement, entertainment, sexual arousal, gratification, or profit of another, or on behalf of another, intentionally permits the use or installation of an imaging device to secretly view, broadcast, or record a person, without that person’s knowledge and consent, who is dressing, undressing, or privately exposing the body, at a place and time when that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy; or(c) For the amusement, entertainment, sexual arousal, gratification, or profit of oneself or another, or on behalf of oneself or another, intentionally uses an imaging device to secretly view, broadcast, or record under or through the clothing being worn by another person, without that person’s knowledge and consent, for the purpose of viewing the body of, or the undergarments worn by, that person.(3) A person commits the offense of video voyeurism dissemination if that person, knowing or having reason to believe that an image was created in a manner described in this section, intentionally disseminates, distributes, or transfers the image to another person for the purpose of amusement, entertainment, sexual arousal, gratification, or profit, or for the purpose of degrading or abusing another person.(4) A person commits the offense of commercial video voyeurism dissemination if that person:(a) Knowing or having reason to believe that an image was created in a manner described in this section, sells the image for consideration to another person; or(b) Having created the image in a manner described in this section, disseminates, distributes, or transfers the image to another person for that person to sell the image to others.http://www.leg.state.fl.us/...
I can understand where criminal acts might be worthy of journalism, if it's for the public's good, right to know: ie. a secret camera uncovers rats and unsanitary conditions in a food factory, for example. Or a politician is caught in some act of corruption. But i fail to see anything remotely close to the 'public needs to know' about the Hulk sex video.
If Hogan knew he was being filmed, it would make sense that it might be part of an attempt to revive what was left of his career, yes. It would also make sense that it was some weird kind of "present" for his friend or his friend's wife, and never intended to be seen outside of their weird little triangle.
That it may have been filmed with the knowledge of all participants doesn't make it legal, much less right, to distribute the file without his permission, and beyond his intended recipients, whoever they may have been.
Pretty much. Society sees women existing as objects to be consumed by (male) society, therefore when a woman is recorded naked without her permission, and the recordings distributed for consumption (again, without her permission), it's seen as a lesser offense than when the same thing happens to a man.In such a setting, privacy for women is a highly malleable concept that may effectively stop existing at any "convenient" time.
I love irregardless, a throwback to the original bloom county days. I also love to use mixed clichés for the same reason. I probably should do that less, as one day it will bleed into my professional work.
I must assume you saw Ms. Lindsay this morning.
Perhaps the confusion regarding what's newsworthy and what's not stems from whether the press should still be considered The Fourth Estate with a role to play in educating and informing our society. As such, one would think editors and journalists would have a responsibility to communicate those stories that add to the common good. I don't see the press under that light and I can understand why a sex tape may be considered as newsworthy. Like all porn, I say it depends on who's in it. I don't care about a video of Hulk Hogan having sex with Heather Clem. Oddly enough, I remember when Tonya Harding's sex tape came out I did want to watch that.
There was audio, but it has since been taken down.
Part of what drove me crazy about Gawker and it's various other pages was the trolls, and the people who defended them. Best part of Wonkette is being able to enjoy a fucking conversation, and know that when the trolls DO come, they'll be ganged up on, deleted, and then mocked every Sunday!
Don't forget the penis pumps!
Somebody 'splain me how knowing about Hulk Hogan's sexcapades helps me, or anyone, understand ISIS, climate change, immigration, crabgrass, or any other thing remotely of concern to any rational human being. Journalism deserves protection. Entertainment wearing a thin tattered veil labeled "journalism" does not.
It's illegal in Florida though, although I don't know how good the source is:810.145 Video voyeurismChapter 810 BURGLARY AND TRESPASS
a) “Broadcast” means electronically transmitting a visual image with the intent that it be viewed by another person.(b) “Imaging device” means any mechanical, digital, or electronic viewing device; still camera; camcorder; motion picture camera; or any other instrument, equipment, or format capable of recording, storing, or transmitting visual images of another person.(c) “Place and time when a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy” means a place and time when a reasonable person would believe that he or she could fully disrobe in privacy, without being concerned that the person’s undressing was being viewed, recorded, or broadcasted by another, including, but not limited to, the interior of a residential dwelling, bathroom, changing room, fitting room, dressing room, or tanning booth.d) “Privately exposing the body” means exposing a sexual organ.(2) A person commits the offense of video voyeurism if that person:For his or her own amusement, entertainment, sexual arousal, gratification, or profit, or for the purpose of degrading or abusing another person, intentionally uses or installs an imaging device to secretly view, broadcast, or record a person, without that person’s knowledge and consent, who is dressing, undressing, or privately exposing the body, at a place and time when that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy;(b) For the amusement, entertainment, sexual arousal, gratification, or profit of another, or on behalf of another, intentionally permits the use or installation of an imaging device to secretly view, broadcast, or record a person, without that person’s knowledge and consent, who is dressing, undressing, or privately exposing the body, at a place and time when that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy; or(c) For the amusement, entertainment, sexual arousal, gratification, or profit of oneself or another, or on behalf of oneself or another, intentionally uses an imaging device to secretly view, broadcast, or record under or through the clothing being worn by another person, without that person’s knowledge and consent, for the purpose of viewing the body of, or the undergarments worn by, that person.(3) A person commits the offense of video voyeurism dissemination if that person, knowing or having reason to believe that an image was created in a manner described in this section, intentionally disseminates, distributes, or transfers the image to another person for the purpose of amusement, entertainment, sexual arousal, gratification, or profit, or for the purpose of degrading or abusing another person.(4) A person commits the offense of commercial video voyeurism dissemination if that person:(a) Knowing or having reason to believe that an image was created in a manner described in this section, sells the image for consideration to another person; or(b) Having created the image in a manner described in this section, disseminates, distributes, or transfers the image to another person for that person to sell the image to others.http://www.leg.state.fl.us/...
I can understand where criminal acts might be worthy of journalism, if it's for the public's good, right to know: ie. a secret camera uncovers rats and unsanitary conditions in a food factory, for example. Or a politician is caught in some act of corruption. But i fail to see anything remotely close to the 'public needs to know' about the Hulk sex video.
Sorry for the length.
Before we begin, here's our retainer agreement...
If Hogan knew he was being filmed, it would make sense that it might be part of an attempt to revive what was left of his career, yes. It would also make sense that it was some weird kind of "present" for his friend or his friend's wife, and never intended to be seen outside of their weird little triangle.
That it may have been filmed with the knowledge of all participants doesn't make it legal, much less right, to distribute the file without his permission, and beyond his intended recipients, whoever they may have been.
Jeez, this whole thing makes my brain hurt.
Pretty much. Society sees women existing as objects to be consumed by (male) society, therefore when a woman is recorded naked without her permission, and the recordings distributed for consumption (again, without her permission), it's seen as a lesser offense than when the same thing happens to a man.In such a setting, privacy for women is a highly malleable concept that may effectively stop existing at any "convenient" time.
I'll take your word for it.
Goddammit ¡Jeb!
We welcome you!! We do NOT welcome that other dude!!
I love irregardless, a throwback to the original bloom county days. I also love to use mixed clichés for the same reason. I probably should do that less, as one day it will bleed into my professional work.
Dunno. I kinda blanked out at that point.