McCain's Alleged Affair

After reading The New York Times article about John McCain's alleged affair I decided to do some research of my own. I found some very interesting comments posted on blogs and various state newspaper articles relating to The Times article. It appears that a lot of people believe The Times should not have run the article and consequently have lost respect for the paper.

Example 1 and 2
Here is a comment I found interesting and I agree with Mr. Hoyt that the article provided absolutely no solid evidence of this alleged affair.

Clark Hoyt, The New York Times’s own arbiter of readers’ complaints, declared that his colleagues had failed to provide sufficient on-the-record evidence to justify the allegations. “The article was notable for what it did not say,” he said. “If a newspaper is going to suggest an improper sexual affair, whether editors think that is the central point or not, it owes readers more proof than The Times was able to provide. The stakes are just too big.”

This same article also points out that people who were previously hesistant about McCain being the Republican Presidential Nominee have now switched gears.

"The New York Times last week, has triggered an unexpected surge of support for him from conservative figures such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham.
These are some of the people who a few days earlier had expressed deep reservations over Mr McCain’s emergence as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. But they appear to hold The New York Times in even lower regard as an unapologetic bastion of liberal influence."

Among other articles I came across relating this subject, I found this one to be somewhat out of the ordinary.
Example 3

With McCain's Affair Public, Ron Paul Is Back In The Race
Now that the New York Times has gone public with John McCain's affair, Ron Paul has a real shot at picking up a lot of McCain's supporters.
Ron Paul announced that he was temporarily scaling back his campaign; but he did not say he was dropping out. Indeed, Dr. Paul decided several weeks ago to:
"Stay in the presidential race in the hope that a scandal would cripple McCain and leave Paul going head to head with Huckabee but essentially shift all campaigning efforts to focus on his Congressional seat which is now under threat."
With the Times' revelations about McCain, this may have been a very wise strategy indeed. The race may suddenly be wide open again.

Here are some other interesting comments regarding the article.
Example 4

While I believe the Times to be the gold standard in journalism and, for the most part, unfairly criticized, I can't help but question both the timing and substance of this article. The fact that the mere possibility of Senator McCain having ties with one lobbyist constitutes such a story/scandal serves only to underscore what an exceptional record of avoiding these very situations he has had. I am fairly certain that comparable stories could be produced for any of the remaining presidential candidates on both sides, and in plenty ; the fact that McCain has one does not constitute a story.

Moreover, I find it noteworthy that this exact story was leaked by the DrudgeReport on December 20th of last year. Evidently it was ready for press at that time, but only published today. The fact that it was shelved, or at the very least delayed, when McCain was fighting for his political life, only to be published once he had become a frontrunner for the presidency, is a coincidence that requires readers of all political bents to suspend their disbelief. While i'm sure that the Times has a well-prepared explanation for this, it nonetheless calls the validity of the story into question.

And, for the record, I write this with no partisan sentiments towards the senator from Arizona; i am an Obama supporter, and I would concede that by running as the anti-special interests candidate, McCain has inadvertently (and perhaps ironically) opened himself up to more special-interests related accusations, as any such story now becomes an issue of character and integrity. I suspect that it is precisely because McCain is widely seen as possesing both such characteristics that a story calling them into question, (despite being, upon further review, a non-story), could cause such an uproar.

Here are two particular posts I COMPLETELY agree with.
Example 5

The NYT endorsed McCain, and then proceeds to excoriate him. Are the Editors of NYT, who approved the piece, without dalliances? I think not, and furthermore what does this have to do with political acumen of a candidate? This latest "dirt" make NYT look like the Daily Nes of 20 years ago! Shame on you all. arnie

I am feeling for the candidate because of this rumor. Even though I am a Democrat and voing for Obama, I don't like these kinds of tactics. If there is proof, then so be it, if not then leave it alone.

This next post I found to be interesting. This person has brought up a scandal that happened years ago as their evidence that McCain really did have this affair The Times is talking about.
Example 6

Come on, we KNOW what liars the fundamentalist hypocritical Republicans are. Sure, they are in both parties, but can anyone remember so MANY perverts and liars as is in the Bush administration.

I think, when the truth is revealed, we sill see that McCain is lying. If this were th only thing, and he could be a good president, I wouldn't care, but he WAS an adult when he was so dishonest about the Keating scandal. He was old enough to know better, and if people are STILL condemning former presidents for what they did (or contenders) then NOBODY should be exempt.

In my opinion I think what The Times did was disgusting. They endorsed Mr. McCain six weeks ago knowing they had this story and that they planned to run it at the most convenient time...right before some of the big state primaries. I have lost a lot of respect for The Times. . I would expect to read about this story in one of those trashy tabloids like Star, but not in one of the most well known and prestigious newspapers in this country. I think the editor of The Times should be fired for running a story with so little evidence and research to back it up. By holding the story since November I think the paper had hoped for more people to turn on McCain, but obviously this is not the case. We are still hearing about Bill Clinton's affairs and that was more than eight years ago, I haven't heard much about McCain's alleged affair since last week...that definitely says something.

Assignment #2: Kline and Burstein blog!

In the introduction of the Kline and Burstein book blog! a Reuters report describes blogs as a place where gossip is spread while also serving as an outlet for people increasingly disenchanted with mainstream media. Perez Hilton’s celebrity blog and Matthew Drudge’s blog are direct examples of this definition.

Thanks to Matthew Drudge the entire world found out about President Bill Clinton’s extramarital affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Another thanks to Perez Hilton for informing die-hard celeb fans that Lindsey Lohan was using cocaine in a bathroom stall at a L.A. nightclub.

Blogs like Matthew Drudge’s act as a checks and balances system of the government. In today’s society, large corporations own a lot of newspapers and news networks and these company bigwigs can impede on and influence the material being discussed in the media outlets. However, blogs are a tool accessible to mostly anyone in order to raise issues that a lot of people are concerned about or want to know more about.

It is unbelievable that blogs have become such a huge part of everyday life. Some people probably don’t even realize that what they are looking at is in fact a blog. Burstein says this growing art form known as blogging is just like conversation, “One member of a tribe initiating another, one generation speaking to the next, one group of humans inspired by and reacting to the ideas of those who came before. The conversation continues and is stored and archived for future access.

I completely agree with Burstein’s description. Blogs tell stories that inform just like stories you hear from your great-grandparents. While some of the information may be a little or a lot exaggerated and would be better characterized as a legend, blogs are just a more futuristic way of storytelling.

I agree with Burstein that blogs are not a passing fad. While they have been around since 1997, they didn’t generate attention until the 2004 presidential election making a huge impact in the cyber sphere. I had no idea that during the months leading up to the election, August in particular, that the ten most popular political blogs had 28 million readers collectively, rivaling the viewership of the three cable news networks. WOW!

Now that newspapers have online editions it makes it easier for the average citizen to comment on an article and by doing this another reader does the same and it becomes somewhat like a blog: People discussing, arguing and informing others. Blogs are everywhere it seems like.

Back to the political aspect of blogs…they not only give the average citizen a voice, but also they help to transport information, questions and concerns to those like potential presidential candidates. For instance, the CNN YOUTUBE presidential debate. While the debate is not a blog per se, it operates in somewhat of the same fashion. Someone looks at the questions and concerns that the average citizen has posted/written and passes them on in order to get the information that the person is requesting. Like Burstein says in the introduction, ““everyone” not has a meaningful shot at being heard as well.”
Kline and Burstein say that according to a Pew Research study, 45 percent of Americans don’t believe what they read in papers or see on television. This is astonishing, but I completely agree. When I watch TV or read the paper I have a little voice in my head telling me to proceed with caution, not of this may be true. Which is why I think blogs are great outlet for everyone. Corporations are even getting on the blog bandwagon.

According to a Reuters report included in the Kline and Burstein book, blog! the word blog was one of the most looked-up words on the Internet in 2004 and because of this it became a new entry on the 2005 version of the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition.

Kline and Burstein make a great case that blogging is the way of the future. I was absolutely shocked to find out that the word blog was one of the most looked up words on the Internet in 2004. However, why is it that when I type the word blog in Microsoft Word it comes up as misspelled?

Blogging or reading blogs are a guilty pleasure for some and an informative tool for others. Regardless, as a journalism student, I agree with Kline and Burstein, blogs are definitely not a fad.