The sensationalism of criminal justice
Posted on January 10, 2008
in Undressing the Internet, controversy, lies, sex, television
On November 5, 2006, the now infamous To Catch a Predator made a somber turn as suspect Louis William Conradt committed suicide after a SWAT team entered his house, Dateline NBC cameras recording the action. The show has been no stranger to criticism, but this shocking ending opened the flood gates.
As NBC was revealing the results of a forensic report on Conradt’s computer (contained porn, including some child pornography), Esquire magazine released an incisive critique of the circumstances surrounding Conradt’s death: Tonight on Dateline This Man Will Die. The article criticizes almost every aspect of the investigation and subsequent arrest, and draws heavily on unaired footage that contradicts the official NBC story.
NBC responded, stressing the number of previous investigations that had led to convictions, and that ultimately, Conradt was a sexual offender. Unfortunately, declining to chastise Dateline NBC for its means in light of its ends moves the debate into murky territory. However, neither should critics editorialize so egregiously (e.g., Esquire expressing disappointment over a detective writing up a warrant for Conradt rather than quitting) when the truth is damning enough.
Either way, none of this bodes well for what journalist John Hockenberry learned about network television at Dateline NBC. (Hint: NBC is in it for the ratings.)
Hillary’s campaign, after her Tuesday night “gang bang” (Wonkette), is claiming that she has come out on top. After a night of stonewalling, contradicting, and avoiding any (let alone direct) answers to tough questions, Clinton now seems, well, taken aback at her opponents negative disposition. She and her staff are disappointed, if you will, that her fellow candidates have “abandoned the Politics of Hope,” that they had all unknowingly signed on to before the debate. Or, rather, it would be more honestly told that Hillary spiked her losing the debate with this clever slogan so that people had no room to bad-mouth her after she again failed to tell voters what it is exactly that she means. Anyway, Clinton has come out on top. While everyone else is “piling on” to her for lying and hiding and dodging, at least she remains hopeful.
Of course, she should really probably just remain in the kitchen.
I really can’t stand Hillary. She was shady as a First Lady and I think that she’s even shadier as a candidate for the presidency. I couldn’t tell you what the woman wants for the country. I think that her response to her opponents’ demands for a more solidly attackable (and a much less flighty, slippery, or tricky) Hillary (who works a little harder to make full document disclosure from her days as Bill’s number two readily available), is pathetic. They’re only attacking you because you’re in the lead? Get a grip. They’re attacking you because if anybody knows anything about anything, they know there is one thing Democrats don’t need in 2008 and it’s another flip-flop, another scandal, or another secretive politician.
I wish Hillary would own up to her beliefs and have a little more faith in the intellect of the common-American. I for one am unconvinced of her sincerity, to say the least.
I mean, all I really wanna do is have sex with John Edwards. Wait, was that too much?