News-Record.com

Welcome to the News & Enquirer.
What a stupid ass thing to post in a community newspaper web site.

Have you ever seen Lisa Ann? She's the splitting image of Gov. Paylin.

I hope McCain wins just for the Paylin porn opportunities

I'm pretty sure Joe's blog is about popular culture, Tony. Popular culture is made by adults, and therefore includes both politics and sex. If that's too much for you I recommend heading over to pbskids.com.

At the top of this post: News-Record.com.
IMO, he should post this crap on his personal blog.
I'll see if the advertiser(s) agree.

Tony:

If you've got a problem with the content of one of our blogs, take it up with our editor.

His e-mail: John.Robinson@news-record.com

But I've got to tell you -- this is hardly the most controversial or potentially offensive thing that has appeared on one of our blogs or, for that matter, in the actual pages of the newspaper.

There's a reason I enjoy living in this country and working for newspapers : because we're free to have discussions about things that are controversial or offensive and a newspaper is exactly the sort of place where that discussion should be happening. On the Internet, even moreso. You're no longer just the audience here -- talk about it.

My making readers aware of Sarah Palin porn is not an endorsement of it -- it's an acknowledgment that it's out there in the culture and an invitation to a discussion about it. If it offends you, let's hear about why -- be part of the discussion rather than suggesting that the discussion shouldn't happen.

If you're not interested in having a discussion with other adults about something that's happening in reality because you think it is unpleasant, then I suggest you do what I do when I encounter something in a publication or website that is at odds with my personal morality: I flip the page or click away, acknowledge that we live in a pluralist country in which we do not all have to agree and glory, for a moment, in just how free we are.

Joe: It's twisted folks like you that are the reason newspapers are losing readers in droves.

In case you haven't noticed, we are choosing to click away from newspapers and turn the page.

Pretty soon, you and John will be the only "adults" having the conversation because you are so out of touch with your readers.

The reason people might object to the post is that it belongs on a personal smut blog, like your personal blog, not on a newspaper website that is supposed to reflect the values of the community.

For the newspaper of record to validate smut about the vice-presidential nominee of the Republican Party by giving it daylight is the bottom of the barrel.

It is beyond prurient to the point of juvenile and asinine.

We would complain to John Robinson, but he has been in his office so long he has lost complete touch with the reality of his surroundings.

FTR, we only came across your jack ass post because of its feed on WE101.

This really is about as low as a newspaper of record can stoop. It's not about being offensive, it's about having some dignity as a publication.

Woah, woah, woah, Tony. You are way off point if you think Killian is the only person to give Nailin Paylin some play.

FOX News certainly mentioned Flint's upcoming production a few times (though something tells me you might not have any problems with that station), as well as several other websites, TV news channels, magazines, blogs, etc. Regardless of the moral or even production quality of this video, it carries some historic significance as Palin is the first woman to run for executive office, and as such, a pornographer thought she would be the perfect subject for an adult film. Instead of getting mad at Killian's post, why not start a discussion about how this landmark for women has also proved that we as a society still have a long way to go in terms of gender equality. After all, no one ever made a porn based on a male Vice President hopeful (though, with a track record of Cheney and Gore over the last 12 years, that would be kind of disturbing), so what gives?

Furthermore, I think this blog is the perfect avenue for entertainment news that's a slight departure from the middle of the road content featured in the print edition. If you personally don't like a blog that chooses not to ignore the real world of pop culture out there and what it says for our society, look elsewhere.

P.S. And while we are on the topic of Fox News' willingness to cover Nailin' Paylin, I thought I would mention the following YouTube video for Fox News Porn (NSFW!). The video is too raunchy to embed into this page, and yet all of the stories came from the most moral, wholesome, and right-wing news source in America. If you watch the video, it's pretty apparent that the channel is sexed up. More so than Killian's blog.

Its a laugh poking fun at the other guys ego boundaries until someone loses an eye. Then sometimes it becomes more fun.

It didn't occur to me to point out -- as Joe does -- that any number of news agencies, including many conservative ones, have mentioned "Nailin Paylin".

I assumed that most people would realize that if they're watching television, reading newspapers or surfing the Internet. Can all of these outlets really be smutty scum giving the finger to the values of the community (and, I suppose, the nation?)

I hoped this post would be a place to have an interesting conversation about it, with everyone welcome to give their view.

But the spat that's developed worries me for media and for the country. When did we become so committed to the idea that media shouldn't show us anything we'd rather not see, and that things with which we disagree shouldn't even be reported on, lest they give offense?

I'd say it's Un-American -- and it is certainly that -- but I think the greater truth is that it's dangerous thinking whoever and wherever you are. How do you decide which values deserve to be represented in as diverse a community as ours and which should be scorned? We live in a city full of young college students, senior citizens, black, white, Latino and Asian Americans, immigrants of all sorts, gay, straight, conservative and liberal citizens of any number of religions or no religion at all...does it really make sense that the city's largest print publication and its website should never publish anything that could offend any of these people while others might find it informative, educational or amusing?

Jeffrey:

I have to point out that while you seem to be attacking Joe for being "prurient" and "juvenile," you also rely on essentially calling him names to try and make your point. Calling someone a "jackass" or "twisted" when trying to have a serious conversation makes me wonder who the "asinine" one is.

But, I follow the local blogs enough to know your style, Jeff, so I'm essentially talking to the breeze.

Joe K., Joe, and Chris,
Based on your logic above are you agreeing that it would be okay for Killian to post the actual video in question when it's produced?
Ah oh! Did that cross the line?
Who serves as the "line" president?
And all of you think it's proper for a revolving ad to display for Wesleyan Christian Academy on the same page as this post?
I sometimes like to provide music for your listening pleasure. Enjoy.

Joe K., I appreciate you taking the time to discuss.

Glad to have the discussion, Tony.

To answer your question -- I wouldn't post the video here, no. But you couldn't find porn videos in other, comparable newspapers or the websites of those newspapers. A report on the fact that the video is being made -- you can and do find that on other, comparable websites. That's essentially how the "community standards" argument functions in obscenity cases and it's the standard I try to keep in mind. I notice no one is making the argument that people at Fox News, the Daily News or any of the other places this has been covered should be fired for suggesting their advertisers should think twice about them.

We are not lesser or less capable of rational discussion of controversial material in Greensboro. The same people who watch and read the content of those outlets read the N&R and its website -- many, many more of them in fact.

This post simply reports that something in the culture is happening. People are then free to discuss it at length -- the way that it demeans female political figures, the way Flynt is using pornography as a political tool, etc., etc.

But instead we're arguing about whether local media websites can or should even report that it's happening. We're arguing about whether we should be having the discussion or if that's only okay for national media outlets or larger papers, whether the sensibilities of the readership here are just too delicate to take something like this.

I don't think they are. I've lived in Greensboro for years and I don't think the readers are too stupid or delicate to see this post as a jumping off point for discussion that's happening elsewhere in the print, TV and web world.

Tony,

Ah, wow. A song from Dylan's worst album. An album so bad, I wholly disregard the music taste of anyone who likes it. Thanks.

But seriously, posting the actual porn for people to view on this page would cross the line since since A) it wouldn't be news, B) it would break copyright to distribute something Larry Flint owns without his permission,C) there isn't a gateway disclaimer on this site warning parents and young web users of explicit adult content, which has been deemed a necessity by the federal government.

That said, Killian didn't post the video and I bet he never will. He posted the NEWS release from Frisky.com, which crosses nothing since the goal of this blog is to give people the NEWS - you know, the stuff that's going on in the world.

You can be the foolish child who sticks his fingers in his ears and goes "BLAH, BLAG, BLAW, MEE, MEOW!" so he can't hear what's going on in the world. That's your choice. But don't expect Killian nor his readership to want to stick our heads in the sand. I like to be aware of what's happening with our society, and a pox on anyone who thinks I shouldn't.

Hey now -- let's have the debate but try to be respectful. I know that train's all but gone when the first few comments attack the blog author and begin the name-calling, but let's restrain ourselves.

Also -- I like "Gotta Serve Somebody" off of that album.

JK

Still a far cry from liking the whole album. Am I right?

Oh, shut up, Joe Killian. You jackass.

Seriously, though, I'm finished with the "What we can talk about" discussion. You boys can carry on but I think Joe K has defended his position well enough.

Here, then, is my take on Nailin' Paylin. I'm not of the opinion that porn, by it's innate nature, demeans women. That's something we carry to the medium ourselves, in the same way we would a romance or an action film.

I also don't believe this is the first time porn has been made about a political figure. Porn parodies of movies, TV shows and public figures go back to the 70's. I think the Silicone Valley porn machine takes aim at any piece of popular culture that meets two prerequisites:

1) It must be extremely popular. Mainstream porn is produced for mass consumption, and there's no room for esoteric references. That's the domain of indie (mostly internet) porn.

2) It must have an element of sexiness in it already. That's why there's no Al Gore porn I know of. However, Joe Scott, I would be shocked (shocked!) if there's no Bush/Dick Cheney porn tropes at this late hour.

Palin's ascendancy made Palin porn a no-brainer. Not only is her name on the tip of every tongue in the nation (man, I should write Hustler's PR), but her supposed attractiveness compared to other politicians has been an aspect of her public persona since her days as mayor. She's admitted to trying to tone it down as governor, saying in an interview that she deliberately "frumps" herself up with the updo and glasses.

I'm neither surprised nor particularly bothered by Nailin' Paylin. I won't watch it, because I don't like Hustler, don't find Palin attractive and can't get off to hokey opportunistic parodies anyway, but none of that has to do with morality. I just prefer my porn to be sexier.

So, anybody want to discuss on those terms?

I do think the porn was inevitable - which is essentially what I said in the post.

I also think that it is an insult to women in politics that they're usually the butt of sexual jokes (which is essentially what this whole thing is, with nudity) when attractive male candidates rarely have to deal with that (where's the Barack Obama porn? He's dreamy, right?).

But what do we expect from the porn industry writ large? This is an industry that's BASED on bad taste.

It's true that political figures have been porn fodder for a while now -- Monica and Bill most prominently and most memorably -- and the tradition of sexualizing the politically powerful for fun and arousal actually goes back to well before the advent of film.

But if the ad copy can be believed, this film may break some sort of dubious porn record for the most political figures in a single film.

This may backfire: I'm embarrassed to say I've heard several of my friends say they'd vote for Senator McCain if they could see Palin naked. How bad is that?

Fox covered this to show how slanderous and immoral the liberal press is!
Killian did not do this.
My opinion he did it to PROVE, how slanderous and immoral the liberal press is.
Honest reporting, would have went after this in a heartbeat. Fox did!
Tony, I think you are right , maybe we should find out if the folks that pay for the ads agree with Killian. Killian I am going to take it up with your editor, not that it matters to him, he a liberal to!

I'm sorry- the assertion is that fox news did what I did - made people aware of information - in order to out the "slanderous" liberal press in the form of .... Pornographic film companies? That sounds reasonable to you? Am I to assume that The Turner Diaries now counts as conservative media?

Also, am I to understand that the argument we're now having wouldn't have occured if I had tacked onto the post something like: "This is a terrible thing and liberals are responsible for it?" rather than letting people discuss the issue themselves?

He a liberal to what, Doug? And do you realize a lot of feminists are very opposed to pornography and other forms of sex work? Feminism is usually considered a "liberal" movement.

I know I said I was done, but come on. This is ridiculous. When Joe writes about, I don't know, the murder of a teenager in High Point, is that the "Liberal Media" endorsing homicide?

Joe linked to a story about the creation of this video in order to inform you of its existence. Rather than take that opportunity to discuss what you think of it, you chose to attack Joe for mentioning it at all. No one has yet explained how Joe's post was any different from any of the other media outlets' reports. No one has explained why an advertiser should be angry about their ad appearing next to this, but not a post about a political view they disagree with, or a news story about a rape, murder or the molestation of a child. In fact, there was nothing in this post that would cause most filtering software to block it, until the comment thread got rolling.

I'm left to assume the anger in this thread is over the fact someone is "slandering" Sarah Palin in what many find a morally objectionable way. Fine, you can be angry about that. But Joe isn't the one making the video, or even expressing approval of it. Joe just told you about it.

I'll attempt to clarify my opinion once more Chris.
I do not think the graphic description in the post is appropriate for a community standards based newspaper. It's my opinion, we disagree, get over it.
It's agreed above by some that Joe would not post the video itself. So there was a line drawn there. I would have drawn the line behind the graphic description or posted it on a personal blog.
It's obviously unimportant to JR. Not a word from him.
Now to the fact that Joe disregards my taste in music. That hurts. Maybe he'll change his mind when I scoot back to the mid 70's and share this Dylan classic with him, a song that I very much enjoy.

Who doesn't like Blood on the Tracks?

Thanks, Tony. That's a reasoned explanation of your opinion. Until now, I didn't realize that you take issue with Joe reposting the description of the video. I assume, then, you would have been fine with Joe posting about the video and only linking to the Frisky.com story.
Like you said, we disagree on where the line should be, and that's fine.

I still think it's crazy to say advertisers should be petitioned in an attempt to bully Joe, JR or Landmark to change that line to your personal tastes. I doubt it'll have much effect, anyway (I've been through this sort of thing), taking that action goes against the spirit of free speech.

This comes down to a matter of bad judgment, something which is not uncommon for this newspaper.

Perhaps we're wrong to expect a Joe Killian to have better judgment than his editor-in-chief.

The real question is why Sara Palin would be in a movie like that.

They have the script from the movie and still photos from the movie Nailin Paylin at :

http://www.twolesbosgoinatit.com/#section2365

The amusing thing is that a large market for this "film" will be Joe 6 Pack and the conservatives who have been nailin palin in their wet dreams since the GOP convention. Read some posts by these creeps or even by Rich Lowry and you'll discover a prurient nature well beyond anything on the left.

I'm not going to google it at work and risk who knows what showing up, but I'm willing to bet you there was some porn made about the Clinton/Lewinsky thing as well.

I just wanted to express my sympathy for what you experienced and my gratitude for the work that you and Mark and all the folks at the N&R do. While yours is not my "hometown" paper (I live in the Triangle), I have come to rely more and more on the perspective that y'all provide as a different - and welcome - view into what's going on in the state.

Tonight, I'm a little embarrassed by something that happened in my state. But I'm much more upset by something that seems to be happening to my country. Thank you for reporting truthfully, even when it means taking blows - figurative, and unfortunately, now literal. We need truth-tellers to combat hate and ignorance (which are not, of course, the sole property of any "party"). I doubt that it's much consolation tonight to learn that your work really matters to some anonymous chica from Chapel Hill, but I wanted to say that anyway.

I cant believe how some people have no sense of humor. The appropriate response is to just sort of shake your head and chuckle a bit. Loosen up, Heck,download some porn!

In regard to those who think this report does not belong in a family newspaper, I disagree. While I think the producers of the video are in very bad taste, and I personally have a problem with pornography because of its objectification of women, I also think that reporting on its existence is perfectly proper. We do not address the ills of our society by pretending they don't exist. Furthermore, we have learned through the media of far worse things happening in real life perpetrated by the US Government at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay and other nameless institutions around the world. A story about a sexy film is nothing compared to the evils that we ourselves have condoned.

The job of a newspaper is not to represent the values of the community.

Its job is to report what's going on. So its readers will, like, know what's going on.

Dig?

"a community standards based newspaper"

What, exactly, is that? Who defines these nebulous "community standards"? Who draws *that* line?

Attention: Registered Nurses, do you know your worth? WE DO...
Increase your pay 100% and get gifts for every hour you work. Start earning your worth.
You deserve it. Start Now.