This is just yet another example of how social media can be a good and bad thing for everyone. It’s a good thing because it allows people to communicate very openly and freely. The information is shared with the public and governmental officials, celebrities and other figure heads have to be held more accountable for their actions. I don’t think Congressman Weiner’s ‘sexting’ problem should be on the front paper or headline the news. Our media should be focused on reporting other important issues facing our nation. But as Americans go, we like our gossip and entertainment a little more than we like to know the latest debate on healthcare reform or relief efforts made in Joplin, MO. Maybe if this keeps up, our government officials would wish they lived in an Authoritarian System where the government controls the press (and limits what they can and cannot say)!

Watching coverage of the Anthony Weiner situation on the Internet and television that week, I’ve noticed this story embodies two things I absolutely detest about modern media.

One is the tendency to focus on the most lurid and titillating topics. Certainly this story has merit, and the media has the obligation to reveal the Congressman’s indiscretions. But when stories like this come up, serious news outlets quickly transform into tabloid press, and they neglect real news that truly affects the American people – topics such as health care reform, as Stephanie mentioned. As quoted in Dr. Willis’ book The Media Effect, a CNN reporter says “the beast must be fed.” But can’t we feed it with something healthier?

The second disturbing issue is that the media uses stories such as this one to set up the modern equivalent of jousting. It’s not enough to have a civil discussion of issues anymore. Now the media feels the need to put two or more talking heads in boxes and let them fight it out. Weiner says he isn’t resigning. The majority of his constituents say they don’t want him to resign. So why do the TV news programs continue to put talking heads on the air arguing about whether Weiner should resign? Enough!

This story sheds even more light on the debate of how much society actually learns about the government and government officials from social media. Society is now in higher demand of “fluff” Hollywood gossip stories than stories that fall into the right and need to know categories of information. It goes in circles to the point that it’s nearly comical. Which came first? The story or the consumer demand for such smut?

Although I personally believe that Weiner’s personal life should remain private, he forfeited that privilege when he became an elected official. Yet, I think society needs to ponder whether or not it would make headlines if their doctor had an affair? What about their child’s teacher? Regardless of an individual’s profession, they are still first, and foremost, a human being. Quite frankly, his affair has no effect on his ability to be an effective representative and should not be making headlines, or even a ripple for that matter. I agree with Stephanie – let’s focus on the real issues.

In The Media Effect: How the News Influences Politics and Government (a book by Jim Willis) we read that today’s media environment is one in which media outlets “serve more as a market for public attention than for news” (145). Consequently, stories like this that lure in audiences based on their “want to know” are likely to receive an overwhelming amount of media coverage. Politicians routinely rely on the media during elections to inform the public of their political platforms and try to harness positive media coverage to win them support, so they must know the power of the press…right? How, then, can they not foresee the media backlash something like sexting would invite? Of course, we’ve all made mistakes even when fully aware of the consequences, but I would think that you’d be more careful if your livelihood were contingent upon the public’s opinion of you; I would think you’d be even more careful with your use of social media, where a “quick and dramatic exposure of such scandals” can ruin your reputation almost overnight, as USA Today pointed out.

As others before me have suggested, I too am concerned with the number of worthwhile news events that have been pushed to the backburner and received significantly less coverage since the Weiner story broke. That being said, I don’t think we should expect anything more of the news media, forever being pressured to cover more of what sells and less of what matters.

I have to respectfully disagree with many of the comments that have been made about this topic—I think that most of you are missing the boat. One comment suggests this story should not be front-page news because “media should be focused on reporting other important issues facing our nation. But as Americans go, we like our gossip and entertainment a little more than we like to know the latest debate on healthcare reform or relief efforts made in Joplin, MO.” Another comment states that, “his affair has no effect on his ability to be an effective representative and should not be making headlines, or even a ripple for that matter” Really? This is not gossip or entertainment; this is a member of Congress who has taken an oath to represent the citizens of New York and is influential in decisions that are made which affect all Americans, so it is newsworthy, and warrants front page attention. Another comment suggests that we should be finding healthier topics, such as healthcare, to “feed the beast” with. Well, we could focus on other issues, but isn’t it vital to make sure that the public servants who are elected to work on the healthcare issue are individuals who demonstrate honesty, character and integrity? Is this story appealing to the public? Of course it is because it involves power, sex and deception—but it involves power, sex and deception of an elected official—which brings it to a level of newsworthiness that cannot be compared to the likes of Paris Hilton or the Kardashian sisters.

It’s interesting how something that should be very personal can blow up into a career destroyer. Many people felt that “Weinergate” shouldn’t have been played out in the media as it was, and question the ethics of the media outlets that published the stories. I don’t believe that it was fault of the media; Anthony Weiner was the one who lost his ethical standards. The first thing he did was violate his ethical standards in his marriage by sending the photos to the female. He then violated the ethical standards of his office by using it to his advantage and sending the messages to the women. ABC News released the messages that were sent, things went to the front page of newspapers, and everything became a whirlwind. I think the media was right in reporting it, but once they started trying to infiltrate the women’s lives who he sent the messages too, I would have to question the media’s ethics. Yes, we love our gossip and stories about “people in high places” lives, but once someone is bombarded, it’s gone too far!

Is is so interesting how many sides there are to this issue. While our privacy is precious and some things should stay within families (and not exploited), it is our social responsibility to act ethically. Let’s face facts,while Anthony Weiner thought he acting out in private, his behavior was on public display. The media is everywhere, and in this day and age, our behavior is not just between God and us. Especially with children having nearly full access to such things, we need to think about what we do and say 24-7.
As a leader and elected official, it is the responsibility of Weiner and other “role-models” to check themselves ethically and morally constantly. Unfortunately, celebrities and government officials get the idea that they are “above the law” or have no one to answer to. They are in the view of our children, so they have all of us to answer to. Whether they think its fair or not, they owe it to us to behave themselves and at least do what is right.

incredible can one increase your site in to my site?i such as the way your blog been recently create. make sure you email me when you have some tips to give me personally admin[at]migsbloggy.org

Learning about social media this semester, there are many positives and negatives attributed to it. It’s great because we have the opportunity to grow as a society, keep in contact with people, establish new relationships, promote businesses, organizations, and companies, and alert people of the day to day happenings. However, there are also many reasons why it is a negative- one of which being “sexting,” which is the point brought up in this blog. However, should this sexting scandal even be able to be on the front news? Do we really need to use social media in this fashion? Is it necessary? As stated in the blog, “media should be focused on reporting other important issues facing our nation. But as Americans go, we like our gossip and entertainment a little more than we like to know the latest debate on healthcare reform or relief efforts made in Joplin, MO.” However, i think i disagree with this statement because yes, it is kind of unnecessary to make light of the scandals of a person, yet at the same time, he is an member of Congress who has taken an oath to represent an indicated group of people. He should be held to higher standards. Maybe instead of making it public knowledge, try another means..