Interesting discussiong going on (still) regarding Boobygate. You remember the whole thing about the Pammy video? Well, there is an interesting, um, well, war going on between some of my favorite posters, with John Hawkins of Right Wing News on one side and Beth of MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, Raven of And Rightly So, Beth at Blue Star Chronicles, and Stacy of Still Stacy on the other side, regarding the use of, let's say, assets, to get traffic. I'm sorry I was in meetings most of the day Tuesday.
To throw in my 1 1/2 cents, I am a man, and like to look at hotties. And, I like reading alot of female blogs. I've said it before. They often bring a very different and intellectual perspective to the table. I have quite a few women blogs on my sidebar, because I like reading them. I like what they write. I read MVRWC and Still Stacy (back when she had Not a Desperate Housewife) before I knew what they looked like. I have no idea what Raven or Beth at Blue Star Chronicles look like, nor Little Miss Attila, Janet from Common Sense Runs Wild, Jody at God Divas (or her previous sites,) etc. I know what a few others, such as Greta at Hooah Wife and Julie at Julie with a B, look like. You know what? It doesn't matter! (If I left anyone out, sorry)
I think the point that was missed in all this, particularly from John's side, is that there is nothing wrong with some cheesecake. We all post stuff like that (except the left. Frowns and flabby butts are not attractive). I do. Heck, that is part of what the Patriotic Pinups are about! But is using ones "assets" to make the news proper in a political/news site?
To put a fine point on it, there are hotties and, I suppose, hunks on the news. That is what the media goes for. Heck, I perk up when someone like Juliet Huddy or Rachel Nichols at ESPN is on. But, while they are pretty (and I never get to see Rachel's legs), the use of sex appeal is not done to a point where it overshadows the message.
Imaging if the talking heads came out wearing speedo's and bikini's. What would that say of the message? Would it be about the message or about the tits and ass (or other things?) Did they cross the line between using said assets for a little boost too simply pandering for ratings? Would it be the same as Naked News (NSFW)? Does anyone actually listen, and respect, Naked News?
The message should be the primary interest, not the boobs. If I want boobs, there are unending amounts on Al Gore's Internet. If I want news/sports/politics, I'll go where I am not being patronized nor pandered to.
Update:
I would be remiss if I didn't mention the always wonderful Cass of Villainous Company, who I have been reading since she was back at I Love Jet Noise. Again, no clue what Cass looks like, and, again, doesn't make a friggin' difference!
And, a wonderful post by Wild Thing on the subject. I was able to see what she looked like, and she actually looks familiar from some of her acting gigs. And, you know what? Doesn't make a freakin' difference, because, until today, I never popped in because of her looks, because, until today, I didn't know what she looked like!
You know, they say there are three things that people want: power, prestige, or wealth. In the Blogosphere, it is hits, links, or respect (well, in the Left-o-sphere it is about really about derangement, raising money for Democrats, and who has the best conspiracy theories.) I have never done much to kick the hits up, and have done some to kick the links up. I would much rather have respect, and, I read all the aforementioned ladies because of respect for them.
