We talked in class about Mayhill Fowler recording Bill Clinton's 'sleazy,' 'slimy,' 'scumbag' speech and the controversy it caused because she was accused of not revealing her mic. Honestly though, Clinton should not be so surprised that his opinion of the Vanity Fair writer surfaced.
With hundreds of people surrounding the rope line, all with cameras and phones recording the event, if Fowler didn't use the audio, someone else would have.
"Off the record," especially for a high profile political figure like Clinton, is hard to come by. Even if Fowler if didn't reveal her mic - she holds fast that she did - for Clinton to spew what he did, no wonder it didn't stay a secret. Hasn't he learned to filter what he says?
As for the second incident involving Fowler and the 2008 campaign, Fowler is the one at fault. If she considers herself a credible and trustworthy journalist, she should hold herself to the same standards as other press professionals. I agree with one of my classmates who said that as a member of the press, she should respect the ethical standards of the profession. If the event was "closed," Fowler should not have been there. Further, such an event probably didn't require an undercover operation.
Was she investigated like the dinner-crashing couple?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment