After the news broke that Sarah Palin’s private e-mail account had been hacked by members of an internet terrorist group (“Anonymous”), Fox News was quick to cast the incident as yet another incident in the media’s traumatic invasions of Sarah Palin’s privacy. This narrative – that “the media” is behind all invasions into Palin’s privacy, and that such invasions are unwarranted – is incorrect and disingenuous.
First, Fox’s attempt to blame “the media” for this hack attack is ludicrous: the culprits (“Anonymous”) have confessed, and no matter how much you hate “the media,” to equate a rogue group of hackers with The New York Times is a plain attempt to fabricate a story that fits better with a partisan worldview than the truth. Similar plays at fearmongering – James Pinkerton seems to think that the Democrats are to blame, and asks, “could you be next?” – are especially preposterous, especially given the Fox constituency’s generally lackadaisical approach to communications privacy. Just as Sarah Palin came on the political stage, the Fox pundits suddenly discovered feminism: now we’re to believe they’ve discovered the value of privacy? Certainly Anonymous’ actions were reprehensible, but to lay the blame at the feet of anyone but a cabal of internet whackos is just wrong.
Second, though I agree that the media’s continued harsh & highly personal coverage of Palin could eventually backfire politically, I do not believe it is morally unjustified. When McCain tapped her, Palin immediately made the election about her private life. Her son Trig proves her commitment to “life.” Her daughter Bristol proves her commitment to “life.” And so on. If Palin seeks to make political hay out of her personal life, she would be naive to expect no-one else to talk about it, and cynical to insist on the same, especially insofar as her personal life bears on her politics (how effective is abstinence-only, Sarah?). At least to a certain degree, she’s brought this upon herself, and her family.
I think McCain wants to see white men attacking Palin, because it distracts from the issue that ought to be deciding the election – the failing economy. In that sense, I almost feel that Palin’s family have been used to bait Liberals, intentionally or otherwise…
Posted by Martin | September 18, 2008, 3:03 pmMartin, you’re back!!!!!
Posted by Ames | September 18, 2008, 4:07 pmObama doesn’t want to talk about the economy in any specifics either.
Posted by Progressive Conservative | September 18, 2008, 4:24 pmO rly?
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/03/obamas-2-minute-closer/
Posted by Ames | September 18, 2008, 4:30 pmMaybe you read a different transcript than me, but where do you see any specifics?
Posted by Progressive Conservative | September 18, 2008, 6:41 pmThe so-called hackers just used Yahoo’s ‘Lost Password’ feature and answered a few questions about her that were part of her public biography in order to reset the password.
There’s a good account of it in Wired Magazine.
This isn’t hacking, it’s minor vandalism, which was aided by her complete lack or attention to even basic computer security principles. If she had done this sort of thing in private industry, and put confidential information in an easily cracked external site, she would get fired for it. Especially since she made no attempt to secure the information.
It’s like calling the police because the 20 dollar bill you left in the middle of the street overnight disappeared. It’s technically a crime, but she’s stupid for leaving it out there.
Posted by Mark B | September 18, 2008, 10:21 pmWOW. Good point.
I guess this is why politicians don’t use Yahoo accounts, unless they’re trying to hide something (like e-mails that she now got to delete).
Posted by Ames | September 18, 2008, 10:25 pmI find this interesting because if this had happened in reverse it would be ‘this is another example of the treachory or conservatives.’
I think she should have killed that account long before she got the nod, and while I don’t consider this a big deal, it’s just very telling to see the way the Left is so un-troubled by an American politician’s privacy being violated but up in arms over eavesdropping on terrorists.
Posted by Progressive Conservative | September 19, 2008, 8:50 amit’s just very telling to see the way the Left is so un-troubled by an American politician’s privacy being violated but up in arms over eavesdropping on terrorists
False equivalency. A private citizen hacking another private citizen’s [unsecured] account is a crime. The government claiming that it can read everyone’s email [secured or not] is fascism. Both are bad, but I’d rather have to deal with a small amount of random crime instead of living in a surveillance state where the government is privy to every aspect of your life.
The kid who did this has already been caught, and is probably going to be given a disproportionate punishment. It was a stupid prank, but I am going to guess the the response will be off the scale in vindictiveness.
Posted by Mark B | September 19, 2008, 9:19 amAccording to a lot of scholars, social interventionism and populism are fascist too.
Do you really want o have that conversation?
Posted by Progressive Conservative | September 19, 2008, 9:49 amI hate it when anyone projects what another group of people will think or believe about an issue. I think it propagates the “liberal vs. conservative” mentality which, again, ignores the vastly overwhelming number of self-identified moderates. It is typically of Rush Limbaugh and the like, which are toxic to the public discourse in our society. Unfortunately, a lot of conservative have been suckered into listening to them (as are many liberals by “left-wing” sources). They also use it to bait people into their shows for publicity by creating a controversy where it doesn’t exist. It is exactly what Hannity did in the video below this post. People need to use their own minds and not project what others (and especially others as a group) believe.
I’m sorry, but I’m tired of people telling me what I think or would do in a situation.
Posted by Ian | September 19, 2008, 11:14 amI agree with Mark.
I can argue what I believe the government should not do such things based on legislation, the constitution, and court decisions…and as a citizen of a democracy I should have that right, but I can’t control what a private citizen does. And I don’t think anyone is saying he should get a pass for the laws he broke?
But if it is true that she was doing public business on her private email account, I lose all sympathy. That was one thing I got pissed off at when the administration did the same thing.
Posted by Oneiroi | September 19, 2008, 12:16 pmSpeaking of the earlier conversation, right when Ames posted that video, I also got an email going here:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/economyvideo
Now it’s not a widespread ad and I’m not sure who it’s aimed at (Just BarackObama.com newsletter people?), but I don’t think it’s too shy abou talking about economics.
He talks about the economy by talking about the tax cuts, increasing regulations, stopping the war. I don’t know how much you can expect in two minutes.
I wrote a rather long campaign strategy of how I think Obama should go about framing his economy talks and how he could have the upper hand, but I think it just means I should start up my own blog again and put it there.
Posted by Oneiroi | September 19, 2008, 12:29 pm