I had thought that my last piece on “Gannongate” was going to be the last thing I wrote on the topic. But, last night, just before bed, I was perusing Christian Grantham’s blog and chanced upon this post. John Aravosis has republished the post of a “a rich DC socialite” offering $20,000 for dirt on Jeff Gannon.
are looking for evidence (photos, phone pictures, locks of hair, DNA on a suit) that Jeff Gannon had any type of sexual, or romantic, relationship with any top-ranking Washington official(s) — or proof that he engaged in any illegal sexual activities or favors.
Not content merely to publish nude pictures of this man, these people want to snoop further into Gannon’s private life. They may be looking for “proof that he engaged in illegal sexual activities,” but they’re also seeking information about the most intimate of his relationships, those of a “romantic” nature.
They’re just digging for dirt. And they’re offering money to make public his private life. Nearly all those who have defended publishing the nude pictures (at least in comments to this blog as well as private e-mails to me) have insisted that Gannon’s ads were already in some sort of “public domain” as they had been published on the web. I have argued that those images were not like information in a blog or news source, but contact ads, serving a different purpose. And as such, they should be treated as private.
Yet, here, they are offering a financial incentive for people to come forward with things that are by their very nature private. There’s no quibbling over whether or not the information sought is public or private (as there is with an online contact ad). The stuff they seek is clearly private. What more do these people want to accomplish? What purpose does finding this information serve?
They have so far exposed that a reporter from a conservative news service with a “miniscule audience” posted salacious contact ads on the web. And have suggested that the White House may have been lax in giving him a press pass. (But, Cheat-Seeking Missiles references an “L.A TIMES” piece that the Bush (43) White House is not the first to issue press passes to reporters with unusual backgrounds.)
By republishing this rich D.C. socialite’s post, John Aravosis paints a clearer picture of his crusade against Jeff Gannon. It is nothing more than a prurient interest in the private sex life of a person with whom he disagrees politically. His blog has thus become the gay Internet equivalent of a supermarket tabloid.
-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com