"Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists"

"Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Vendaval -> "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 1:21:38 PM)
I really hope that the persons responsible for this harassment are caught and prosecuted. Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists By Maggie Hendricks / Y! Sports Blogs Mon Jul 20, 2009 5:26 pm EDT "That doesn't even take into account that women on television are judged for not just what they know but what they look like. Most female sports journalists have dealt with these difficulties with aplomb. However, they were magnified considerably this week when ESPN reporter Erin Andrews became a victim of video voyeurism after someone shot video of her in a private moment through her hotel room peephole. In conjunction with ESPN and her attorney, Andrews is working with authorities to catch the perpetrators of this heinous act, but the damage has been done. Her privacy has been invaded, and the video of her naked body is out there. Most Web sites have deleted the video under threat of legal action, but that can't undo the fact that it was shot and posted in the first place." http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/post/Assault-on-Erin-Andrews-privacy-scary-for-all-f?urn=top,177592

Loki45 -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 1:25:17 PM)
Funny how 'assaults on privacy' are only important when it's against a woman. Very strange. However a man can have his personal details, conversations, etc showed to the world and all he gets is ridiculed.

Vendaval -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 1:29:13 PM)
Can you name one male sports journalist who was a victim of video voyeurism and had his naked body posted to the Net? * Edited to specify "sports journalist" and "naked body" parts, addendum.

Loki45 -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 1:39:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval Can you name one male sports journalist who was a victim of video voyeurism and had his naked body posted to the Net? * Edited to specify "sports journalist" and "naked body" parts, addendum. I believe I made no mention of voyeurism or naked body parts. My comment was direct specifically to the "assault on privacy." Privacy violations are more than just pictures and video. Ahh but no one cares unless it's pics or video of a woman. As long as it's just details, conversations, etc of a man, no one cares and he should 'suck it up.' Don't get me wrong, I'm not for nonconsentual video voyeurism in any form. Surely the guy should go to jail. But privacy violations have occured long before this. Why is it that when it's against a woman that everyone gets riled up? Why were 'privacy violations' allowed to progress to this point? There certainly were violations in privacy long before this.....just not video...or not against the women perhaps.

Vendaval -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 1:52:57 PM)
Who is "everyone"? And can you provide specific examples of privacy invasion in regards to male sports journalists? (grammar edit)

LadyConstanze -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 1:53:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval Can you name one male sports journalist who was a victim of video voyeurism and had his naked body posted to the Net? * Edited to specify "sports journalist" and "naked body" parts, addendum. I believe I made no mention of voyeurism or naked body parts. My comment was direct specifically to the "assault on privacy." Privacy violations are more than just pictures and video. Ahh but no one cares unless it's pics or video of a woman. As long as it's just details, conversations, etc of a man, no one cares and he should 'suck it up.' Absolute rubbish! Max Mosley your typical example? He fought back AND WON! Good for him! But darling, in each and every post you display some serious problems with women, so because of your complex it's alright if a woman's privacy is violated by taking a video of her while she is undresses? How often does that happen to guys?

Loki45 -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 1:59:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval Who is "everyone"? And can you provide specific examples of privacy invasion in regards to male sports journalists? Who is everyone? Well, let's start with you.....or the people of this message board, for example. There have been....oh hell I'd say at least a handful of instances of privacy violations in recent years...I don't recall any generating this kind of commotion. Most were fodder for poking fun at the guy. Or hell....why not just go visit tmz? They violate privacy DAILY. But no one seems to mind. But then that's because they don't show naked people. Oh wait...they did show Britney with no underwear on, didn't they? Nevermind that the guy had to get at GROUND LEVEL right where the car door opened in order to get the shot. But that's ok, right? Just tabloid stuff...right?

Loki45 -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 2:02:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze Absolute rubbish! Max Mosley your typical example? He fought back AND WON! Good for him! But darling, in each and every post you display some serious problems with women, so because of your complex it's alright if a woman's privacy is violated by taking a video of her while she is undresses? How often does that happen to guys? Interesting. You completely mis-read my post and read things into it that weren't there. Who the hell is Max Mosley? As far as what you think I said.....I plainly said I'm against nonconsentual video voyuerism. But why is it that violations of people's privacy were fodder for late night jokes prior to now? Why has it been allowed to progress? And no, as my previous post pointed out, it's not just a man/woman thing as I indicated. It seems even I forgot the flap over Britney's panties. Why is that ok, but suddenly now there's some big flap over a key hole video? Why does no one care that a camera man practically laid on the ground, purposely shooting up Britney's skirt as she got out of a car? Why is that "shame on Britney," but this is "oh poor Erin?"

Vendaval -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 2:03:01 PM)
I don't pay much attention to the tabloids such as TMZ. Are you now worried about Britney running around without her underwear? Because that is a choice she made on how to dress or not dress in public, knowing that photographers follow her every move. Ms. Andrews had a reasonable right to expect privacy in her hotel room and had not agreed to be photographed. Can you not understand the difference?

LadyConstanze -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 2:03:58 PM)
Has it ever crossed your mind that Britney is a woman? Just saying.... As to your answer, you know "Well, let's start with you.....or the people of this message board, for example." How's that specific? Now if you recall all those instances, wouldn't it be easy to link to one? And all of them had privacy violations of males?

Loki45 -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 2:05:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval I don't pay much attention to the tabloids such as TMZ. Are you now worried about Britney running around without her underwear? Because that is a choice she made on how to dress or not dress in public, knowing that photographers follow her every move. Ms. Andrews had a reasonable right to expect privacy in her hotel room and had not agreed to be photographed. Can you not understand the difference? I think what you're not understanding is the connection made. I find it hard to name one woman that has not, at some point gone out sans panties to avoid a pantyline. So....it's Britney's fault that she was photographed by a guy laying on the ground, shooting up her skirt (which is against the new "up-skirt laws" by the way)? THAT is how we get to what we have with Erin Andrews. No one cared about details being made public. No one cared about the lengths trashy tabloid photographers will go to. But oh.....a key-hole video...that's too far.

Loki45 -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 2:06:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze Has it ever crossed your mind that Britney is a woman? Just saying.... Has it ever crossed your mind that you should read every part of a post before replying? Just saying... If you had, you'd have noticed the line: quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 And no, as my previous post pointed out, it's not just a man/woman thing as I indicated. It seems even I forgot the flap over Britney's panties.

LadyConstanze -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 2:14:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze Absolute rubbish! Max Mosley your typical example? He fought back AND WON! Good for him! But darling, in each and every post you display some serious problems with women, so because of your complex it's alright if a woman's privacy is violated by taking a video of her while she is undresses? How often does that happen to guys? Interesting. You completely mis-read my post and read things into it that weren't there. Who the hell is Max Mosley? As far as what you think I said.....I plainly said I'm against nonconsentual video voyuerism. But why is it that violations of people's privacy were fodder for late night jokes prior to now? Why has it been allowed to progress? And no, as my previous post pointed out, it's not just a man/woman thing as I indicated. It seems even I forgot the flap over Britney's panties. Why is that ok, but suddenly now there's some big flap over a key hole video? Why does no one care that a camera man practically laid on the ground, purposely shooting up Britney's skirt as she got out of a car? Why is that "shame on Britney," but this is "oh poor Erin?" If you have no clue who Max Mosley is, you might want to start reading newspapers instead of tabloids. Seems you follow TMZ rather closely, since I don't, I can't tell you if they reported on the privacy violation of Mr. Mosley. Now Britney actually got out of a car and flashed her naked crotch, a bit like Paris Hilton did, got her headlines, there is a massive difference between going without underwear and a very short skirt in a public place place where you know there will be paparazzi and then get out of the car and treat everybody to a glimpse of your crotch and having your privacy violated as Ms Andrews did. Call me a cynic, I worked in the media for long enough to be suspicious how those things tend to happen when there is a new album, perfume, movie, etc. to be released, a huge difference between people wanting a headline and something that is just horrible and wrong. And that tends to happen to women a lot more often, now we shouldn't be upset about it, because a guy might be able to find some single incident where a guys privacy was violated? How does that compare to having your naked body displayed all over the net without your consent? She wasn't in a public place, it wasn't that some ex-lover talked to the press, it was somebody who filmed her through a peephole.... BIG DIFFERENCE! MAJOR DIFFERENCE. In case you get involved with somebody, there is the chance - though it should not happen - that the person will betray your trust, it's a risk everybody takes, being ALONE and somebody films you naked and without your consent, you have no choice in the matter, you did nothing to invite it, did not put yourself at risk. What's soooo difficult to understand about that?

LadyConstanze -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 2:19:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 Funny how 'assaults on privacy' are only important when it's against a woman. Very strange. However a man can have his personal details, conversations, etc showed to the world and all he gets is ridiculed. That was your original post, and then you come back with that it is not a man/woman issue? Oh please....

pixidustpet -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 2:21:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 As far as what you think I said.....I plainly said I'm against nonconsentual video voyuerism. But why is it that violations of people's privacy were fodder for late night jokes prior to now? Why has it been allowed to progress? And no, as my previous post pointed out, it's not just a man/woman thing as I indicated. It seems even I forgot the flap over Britney's panties. Why is that ok, but suddenly now there's some big flap over a key hole video? Why does no one care that a camera man practically laid on the ground, purposely shooting up Britney's skirt as she got out of a car? Why is that "shame on Britney," but this is "oh poor Erin?" its the expectation of privacy. britney spears KNOWS that as a "celebrity", there are going to be people taking photos of whatever she is (or isnt) wearing. and her mama should have showed her YEARS ago how to get in and out of a car gracefully. this sports reporter was in her hotel room, with the drapes drawn. that has some expectation of privacy. no one expects video of undressing in a hotel room alone to show up anywhere. and THAT is why its an assault on her privacy, just as if someone had snuck a video camera into her bedroom at her home. and for the record, i think photographers who peer into any place that a person has an expectation of privacy is despicable. from this video to a resturant owner who puts a peephole camera in the restrooms of his dining establishment, its all wrong. kitten

Vendaval -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 2:23:53 PM)
I don't know what kind of fashion sense your women companions favor. But personally, I know no women who go out in public without underwear while wearing short skirts or dresses knowing that cameras will be present. And the Hollywood types use a product known as Spanx to provide a smooth line and still protect their privacy. I also agree with Lady Constanze about the timing of some of Britney's escapades being suspect. Being photographed naked inside your home, hotel room or another place where you can reasonably expect privacy is a serious personal invasion and it is much more likely to happen to women rather than men. And Erin Andrews was specifically targeted because she is a high profile journalist who is serious about her career and also attractive. That these photos were published on the Net makes it that much worse. quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval I don't pay much attention to the tabloids such as TMZ. Are you now worried about Britney running around without her underwear? Because that is a choice she made on how to dress or not dress in public, knowing that photographers follow her every move. Ms. Andrews had a reasonable right to expect privacy in her hotel room and had not agreed to be photographed. Can you not understand the difference? I think what you're not understanding is the connection made. I find it hard to name one woman that has not, at some point gone out sans panties to avoid a pantyline. So....it's Britney's fault that she was photographed by a guy laying on the ground, shooting up her skirt (which is against the new "up-skirt laws" by the way)? THAT is how we get to what we have with Erin Andrews. No one cared about details being made public. No one cared about the lengths trashy tabloid photographers will go to. But oh.....a key-hole video...that's too far.

Loki45 -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 2:24:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze If you have no clue who Max Mosley is, you might want to start reading newspapers instead of tabloids. Seems you follow TMZ rather closely, since I don't, I can't tell you if they reported on the privacy violation of Mr. Mosley. I don't read tabloids but apparently lots of comedians and late-night hosts do as they often get fodder for their jokes from them. I personally abhor tmz an think its so-called journalists should fall off the planet. quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze If you have no clue who Max Mosley is, you might want to start reading newspapers instead of tabloids. Seems you follow TMZ rather closely, since I don't, I can't tell you if they reported on the privacy violation of Mr. Mosley. Now Britney actually got out of a car and flashed her naked crotch, No, actually she didn't. She got out of a car, the same way most women do when wearing short skirts. It just so happens she had no underwear on.....as other women have done and still do. However in her case, the photographer was laying ON THE GROUND shooting up at her from the moment she opened her door. And this is ok? quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze there is a massive difference between going without underwear and a very short skirt in a public place place where you know there will be paparazzi and then get out of the car and treat everybody to a glimpse of your crotch and having your privacy violated as Ms Andrews did. But both are still privacy violations. And both are against the law, supposedly. quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze because a guy might be able to find some single incident where a guys privacy was violated You can drop that bone now, I've already addressed that in a prior post now. I expect there will be a few more posts from you where you cling to it rabidly, but you can in fact let it go now. quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze She wasn't in a public place, it wasn't that some ex-lover talked to the press, it was somebody who filmed her through a peephole.... BIG DIFFERENCE! MAJOR DIFFERENCE. Yeah...and the difference is this is where the previous events have led to. First it was "oh, the celebrity is on the red carpet, it's ok to take pics of them." Then it was "oh, they're a celebrity, so it's ok to follow them around....we want to see them buying tampons!!" Then it became "Oh, they're a celebrity, so people want to see shots of them dropping their children off at school." And let's not forget the recent "Oh she's a celebrity, so up-skirt photography is OK....it's her fault for not wearing panties." And this is where all of that line of thinking has led us. One naked pussy is the same as another. If we say one is "ok" sooner or later someone will push that envelope a little further.

Loki45 -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 2:26:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze That was your original post, and then you come back with that it is not a man/woman issue? Oh please.... Yeah, it's called amending my original position. So noted through MY other post where I CONCEDED that it was NOT a man/woman thing. Now for fuck's sake let it the fuck go.

Loki45 -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 2:28:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pixidustpet its the expectation of privacy. britney spears KNOWS that as a "celebrity", there are going to be people taking photos of whatever she is (or isnt) wearing. and her mama should have showed her YEARS ago how to get in and out of a car gracefully. This is exactly the mindset that led to the keyhole video. A woman can't "expect" a little decorum when she gets out of a car, why would she expect it when there's a door with a keyhole in it? See my point? It's the increasing lengths to which so-called journalists will go to get the next big 'thing' in the media. Women celebrities can't sunbathe in their own fucking back yard without tabloid freaks in the trees across the street. This incident is the next logical (albeit highly illegal) step. Why can someone expect privacy in a hotel room when they can't expect it in their own home? Edited because apparently when typing fast, I don't know how to spell 'sunbathe.'

Mercnbeth -> RE: "Assault on Erin Andrews' privacy scary for all female journalists" (7/21/2009 2:34:18 PM)
quote: ...But personally, I know no women who go out in public without underwear while wearing short skirts or dresses knowing that cameras will be present.... [sm=wave.gif] sorry, Vendeval...but this slave is guilty of it...especially at Folsom!!! however, she's hardly an internet nudity virgin...[:)]

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.785156E-02