Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Journalist Juice. Shot in the ... | Re: The Media and Mark Foley »

Friday, October 13, 2006

The Media and Mark Foley

posted by on October 13 at 10:00 AM

In today’s LA Times, Michelangelo Signorile makes an obvious point: It’s not just Republicans who should be blamed for enabling Mark Foley’s destructive life in the closet, but also the D.C. media.

By not reporting on Foley’s deceitful life for more than 15 years — during which he portrayed himself as a heterosexual politician — the media enabled a man overwhelmed by the destructiveness of the closet to ultimately implode in the halls of Congress. By looking the other way on something that made them uncomfortable — reporting on closeted gay public figures, particularly those who are hypocrites — and by deluding themselves that it’s a privacy issue, reporters, producers and editors took part in perpetuating a fiction, one that may well have led to an ugly outcome.

This is similar to an argument I made last year in The Stranger regarding the rumors that long swirled around former Spokane mayor Jim West (destructively closeted) as well as the rumors that more recently have swirled around state senator Luke Esser (not closeted). In both situations, a simple question from a reporter might have helped: “Are you gay?” (In Esser’s case, when I asked him last year, the answer was “No,” putting the rumors to rest.)

The generous explanation for why reporters here didn’t ask is that a sense of propriety stopped them. A less generous explanation might be that a subtle form of homophobia was at work, one that made reporters think asking might lead to a “shameful” revelation. Either way, this reluctance to ask has twice caused a problem to drag on too long. First it was Jim West, who was never asked about the “open secret” that he was gay while he was busy voting against gay rights in Olympia. And now it’s Esser, the rumors about whom could have been debunked long ago with one phone call.

I realize this is a complicated issue, and that asking the question might not always be a magic bullet for stopping a destructively closeted public figure. But if we believe that being gay is not a shameful thing, then there’s no harm in asking. And by not asking, it seems to me, the media only contributes to a closeted public figure’s sense that he or she can get away with anything — a sense clearly felt by Foley, and West.

UPDATE: See above.

RSS icon Comments

1

Eli, Esser is a closeted gay man and this fact is well known in Olympia. But being gay is not the issue unless the person involved has a long history of voting against and being a leader against every bit of civil rights legislation that has come before the Senate. And if you run the tape of his testimony during and after the civil rights bill passed the Senate last year you will see an Esser who was angry and visceral in his opposition.
So does this matter? Is this a just descussion to have? Well, when you look at Jim West and the scope of his hypocracy and you look at Foley and the extent of his hypocracy, then YES, Esser's hypocracy does matter.

Posted by Particle Man | October 14, 2006 4:59 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).