Redefining the 'Private Lives' of Public Officials
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Women: United States Redefining the ‘Private Lives’ of Public Officials Women journalists have played a major role in this changing coverage. By Florence George Graves or some journalists—especially people more about today’s journalism whether particular allegations of inap- those with old-guard thinking— than the blurring of lines between the propriate or abusive sexual behavior— Fthe September 11 World Trade public records of candidates and their the kind that was well known in the Center attacks that led to aggressive private lives,” Broder wrote. And in a past by some reporters but kept from reporting on Osama bin Laden and New York Times op-ed, Schlesinger readers and viewers—merit journalis- bioterrorism brought an oddly wel- posited that “Reporters seem obses- tic scrutiny. This reassessment has been comed relief. Then Enron followed. sively interested these days in getting part of evolving changes in society, Finally, there was a return to “real candidates to tell all” about various which for centuries had been condi- reporting,” and “important journal- aspects of their private lives including, tioned to believe—based on Aristotle’s ism.” No longer was there a focus on he says, “their sex lives.” In arguing for conception of the private and public “tabloid stories” such as Gary Condit tighter guidelines, he wrote that “A spheres—that anything involving and the missing Chandra Levy and what- measure of privacy is of estimable value women (considered a lesser order) or ever they were doing in private that in protecting the stability and sanity of sex (even abusive sex)—belonged in dominated some news outlets before our public servants.” the private realm. As attention increas- the 11th. No more messy tales about Public officials, like private individu- ingly has been paid to consequences of Bill Clinton and Paula Jones or Monica als, deserve a zone of privacy. On that inappropriate sexual behaviors, jour- Lewinsky. In their minds, at least, no point there is little debate. However, nalists—among others—have helped more voyeuristic reporting on the so- far too often those urging privacy sug- the public to understand that many called “private lives” of public officials. gest that all stories with a sexual angle behaviors involving sex should be con- Of course, for some media organiza- are, by definition, about a public sidered legal or ethical matters rel- tions, especially the supermarket tab- official’s private life. Although it per- evant to the public interest. loids and some cable news networks, haps should seem obvious by now, Intellectually, at least, most of us there’s no question that a primary at- some critics still fail to fully recognize now accept almost without question traction in these stories was the sure- that even if an abusive sexual act is that rape, incest, child molestation, to-boost ratings combination of sex, committed in private—meaning no and child pornography are not private power, fame and mystery. This is inevi- witnesses, or in what traditionally has matters. Rape was the first abusive be- table when the story involves an emo- been considered a person’s private havior to face legal sanction. As a soci- tion and instinct as powerful, mysteri- realm—it still may be of legitimate ety, we have been slower and more ous and easily exploited as sex. But public concern as a potential violation ambivalent about judging—legally or even though the media sometimes re- of law or ethical standards. Some ex- ethically—abusive behavior when it port gratuitous stories involving sex— hortations for privacy also suggest that involves subtler questions concerning something I regard as unethical—we the way a politician (usually these sto- consent among adults. should not forget why some aspects of ries involve males) treats women (or What about a husband who forces what for decades the press has defined men) has no relevance to his fitness for his wife to have sex against her will? Is as the “private lives” of public officials, office. that a private, family matter? What about when reported responsibly, are not Before this kind of backlash think- a boss who demands that his secretary only of legitimate public interest but ing takes hold, it is important to reflect have sex with him to keep her job? Is also important to pursue and publish. on how and why perceptions about that private? What about a boss who Unfortunately, this is not the mes- what should or shouldn’t be consid- makes repeated sexual advances to an sage some influential media commen- ered publicly relevant sexual behavior employee but does not make any overt, tators seem to be sending. In the wake have changed during the past 30 years. explicit quid pro quo? What about a of the Monica experience, for example, It remains very rare for a journalist to boss who has what he says is a “consen- historian and former presidential as- ask about a politician’s truly private sex sual” sexual relationship with an em- sistant Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. and Wash- life, as it should be. However, thanks in ployee? Does that mean it is consen- ington Post columnist David Broder part to the increased presence of sual? Does that mean it is ethical? What each have warned journalists about women as both reporters and editors, about a politician who presents him- invading the “private lives” of public particularly political journalists, media self as a happy family man and publicly officials. “[N]othing seems to bother decision-makers are finally asking promotes women’s equal rights while Nieman Reports / Spring 2002 69 Women: United States like the most obvious follow-up story. At the time, I wondered why no major news organizations were doing it. Working as a freelance journalist, I began months of reporting to confirm the Senator Bob Packwood story, most of the time in despair, fearing it would never be published. I am pretty certain that, pre-Anita Hill, no major newspa- per would have published it. Even post-Anita Hill, I had trouble finding a news organization willing to take it on before I finally decided to approach The Washington Post, which eventually agreed to pursue it. Others I’d approached told me they didn’t consider it “a story.” If it was a story, a major newspaper would have done it already, or so the thinking went. Some media brass still considered it a story Former senator Bob Packwood catches an elevator in the Capitol a few hours after his “about sex,” about Packwood’s private resignation on September 7, 1995. On September 6, the Senate Select Committee on life, instead of about abuse of power Ethics had concluded its three-year investigation into allegations of sexual and other that involved sexual misconduct rather misconduct by recommending his expulsion. Photo by Kenneth Lambert, courtesy of The than financial or some other miscon- Washington Times. duct traditionally deemed relevant to the public interest. After the Packwood story—a story of “privately” is a serial adulterer? What inappropriate sexual remarks by Su- repeated sexual misconduct by the about a politician who has an affair preme Court nominee Clarence Tho- senator over many years—was pub- with a young woman who later disap- mas came five years after the 1986 lished in 1992, political pundits and pears without a trace? landmark U.S. Supreme Court deci- prominent journalists acknowledged These are the kinds of questions sion in Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson there had been rumors about Packwood society—and journalists—have been established that even a “hostile work- suggesting this behavior for years. Ap- grappling with over the years. It wasn’t place” (not just quid pro quo harass- parently none had bothered to follow until the early 1980’s that an increasing ment) could be illegal sexual harass- up sufficiently. One reason might have number of courts began to adopt femi- ment. This decision led U.S. companies been the prevalent shared narrative nist and legal scholar Catherine to create major new guidelines and that sexual favors were a perk of the MacKinnon’s theory that sexual harass- training programs for employees. Even powerful. This sense of privilege was ment is a form of illegal sex discrimina- so, much of the press and the Congress reinforced by the fact that Congress tion. Prior to that, society did not view seemed unaware that sexual had exempted itself from most work- sexual harassment as a violation of a harrassment was a significant problem place laws—including sexual harass- person’s rights. The “shared narrative” for women in the workplace. As Geneva ment—that it had passed for employ- said it was considered private, or “the Overholser, then with The Washington ers in the rest of the country. (This way things are,” or perhaps a cost of Post Writers Group observed, exemption disappeared for senators being a woman in the workplace. And “Women’s reporting” made the Tho- after the Packwood case, when the Sen- over time, as author Suzannah Lessard mas-Hill story about allegations of un- ate adopted the Congressional Account- observed when writing in Newsweek ethical conduct “the story it was.” In ability Act of 1995.) about presidential candidate Gary fact, “I don’t think it would have been Or perhaps journalists had internal- Hart’s “Monkey Business” in 1987, “a that story if men had been the only ized some editors’ attitudes. For ex- feminist sensibility has seeped into the ones in those political reporting posi- ample, when we were guests on Na- public consciousness…” so that even tions,” she told Columbia Journalism tional Public Radio’s “On the Media” unethical behavior such as Hart’s be- Review.