Clinton Scandal Essay Example

Big Role in Sex Controversy," David Noack of E;P expertly outlines the convoluted path this narrative followed, from mere rumor to investigation to publication, with the Internet playing a pivotal role. Noack observes that the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal has profoundly transformed online media, stating: "A year ago, most newspapers and news magazines adhered to the hard rule that they would not stoop themselves by putting breaking news on their Web sites before it appeared in their print editions."

Even major publications such as the Washington Post and Newsweek have had to disregard the old rule due to the public's growing demand for immediate online coverage of breaking national news. The emergence of online media has placed journalists on par with radio and TV, challenging the notion that publishing breaking stories online would lessen their influence in print. Matt Drudge, founder of The Drudge Report, played a significant role in catalyzing this departure from traditional conventions.

Despite the current Internet boom and the widespread pursuit of financial gain, it is interesting to note that Matt Drudge, who embodies the revolutionary aspects of the Internet, has not profited greatly from it. At just 30 years old, Drudge is responsible for The Drudge Report - a website (http://www.drudgereport.com) that provides gossip about entertainment, political rumors, and clever meta-news. Despite its simplistic design featuring only headlines, links to news sources, and black and white clip art, Drudge possesses remarkable knowledge as he reads 18 newspapers daily. He demonstrates a deep admiration for politics by presenting both sides of a story when necessary. Despite his mailing list having over 85,000 subscribers and his following rapidly growing, there has been no equivalent increase in

his bank account.

Last week, this web journalist caused consternation in the White House by flagging a story that Newsweek had kept hidden for six months. The story revealed that President Clinton may have made advances towards Kathleen Willey, a White House employee, while on federal property. A recent article I found on the Internet captures the diverse opinions people have about Drudge: he is considered the best thing about the Internet as he effectively utilizes online platforms, prioritizes being fast and breaking news, and successfully engages with an audience that craves personality and gossip.

The most detestable aspect of the Internet is represented by Matt Drudge. He specifically caters to the least intelligent individuals and often spreads misinformation, causing great uneasiness among traditional journalists.

We do not want him to represent us, but do we have a choice? What caused Drudge to become such a Net phenomenon? He began delving into areas where others were afraid to venture into, particularly the White House. He was the one who exposed the Kathleen Willey story: she was a hesitant witness for the Paula Jones defense team, an employee of the White House who sought solace from the president when she worried about her husband's potential troubles. Drudge undeniably caught the White House's attention with his story.

Although it may be considered inappropriate to support unethical reporting, it is important to recognize that Drudge does not consider himself a journalist and has never made such a declaration. Drudge is an innovator in the Information Age, exploring new and unfamiliar territories. He does not follow the same principles as traditional media organizations. Newspapers have invested significant resources, possibly amounting to billions of

dollars, in finding the most efficient methods of sharing their content on the Internet due to its significance for the future. This approach offers advantages like speedy and convenient analysis of news sources from various locations across the United States.

Both the establishment press and the truth police at the White House are equally terrified by the discovery, alarming them to the extent that they are taking legal actions against news links provided by Drudge and WorldNetDaily. Big news organizations like The Washington Post and CNN have resorted to lawsuits in order to prevent ordinary consumers from comparing their news accounts with other news organizations'. The White House, which was previously allied with the establishment press, is now attempting to erase Drudge completely and will not settle for any other outcome.

The lawsuits are not about monetary compensation or apologies, but rather about the eradication of alternative voices. If the White House goon squad succeeds in silencing Drudge, the media landscape will undoubtedly become less captivating and less democratic within the realm of news. Steve Silberman, a writer for Wired magazine, reluctantly commended Matt Drudge for his role in breaking the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal in one of his columns: It's a Drudge World After All: In Drudge's world, which is now our world, the most important thing is to unveil what was previously concealed - to gather insider information, traverse bureaucratic barriers, and defy spin-doctors in order to expose candid sources of information. Additionally, spreading this uncovered information enthusiastically is just as significant as the act of digging up the dirt itself.

The speed at which garbage in, garbage out is processed is the key. This velocity may make

traditional journalists feel uneasy or tainted. The Clinton/Lewinsky scandal exemplifies a story that is both nasty and dirty. However, beyond this, they are also behaving recklessly. Individuals like Drudge, who operate in the fast-paced, competitive realm of the Web, are not urging us in that direction.

In the early days of the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal on Jan. 23, when both individuals involved were denying any wrongdoing, media commentators on television and radio were already mentioning terms such as resignation and impeachment. This hasty assessment appears to be a rush to judgment in my opinion. While pack journalism and media frenzies are not new occurrences, the internet has altered the nature of these collective actions.

Eleanor Randolph and Jane Hall from the Los Angeles Times discuss the consequences of extensive media coverage in their article titled "Media Coverage Turns Into a Full Press." They suggest that when a sensational story with limited information receives continuous coverage, it inevitably leads to a deplorable situation where networks end up repeating half-truths and insinuations. This occurs because there is a need to fill airtime and individuals appearing on these programs often have their own hidden agendas. Whether this viewpoint holds true or false, it requires considerable patience to effect any change because this phenomenon is pervasive. It is effortless to find news about the ongoing scandal in the White House, but much harder to avoid it. Despite being a prominent feature across newspapers and television programs, much of the reporting is repetitive, with major newspapers surprisingly sluggish in providing updates. The same concerns of censorship and morality that plague traditional print and broadcast outlets also afflict internet media.

The media's decision to publish

the President's personal letters, including one from Kathleen Willey expressing her support and appreciation, seems illogical. However, they choose to censor explicit language in the transcripts of conversations between Monica Lewinsky and Linda Tripp. In one exchange, Tripp expresses concern about potentially committing perjury if asked about Lewinsky's relationship with the president.

That is my objective. It seems that you truly believe this is straightforward and I should simply disregard it. They are unable to verify it. In what manner does it affect the American people whether Kathleen Willey approves of the President's actions? (No pun intended) And I am certain that if we can handle the fact that President Clinton engaged in oral sex with his intern who was 21 years old, we can handle the use of a four letter word. The Clinton-Lewinsky scandal may have initiated an unparalleled media frenzy, but scandals are not unfamiliar to the American Presidency.

In the Oval Office's history, there have been instances where presidents engaged in inappropriate relationships with unscrupulous political partners or women who were not their spouses. The walls of the White House carry many tales if they could speak. One such instance occurred during Woodrow Wilson's presidency from 1913 to 1921. Despite being raised by a strict Calvinist minister, Wilson earned the nickname "The Merry Widower." Interestingly, Sigmund Freud portrayed Wilson as someone who saw himself as a counterpart to Jesus Christ.

Prior to his wife's passing just two years into his first term, Wilson had maintained an impeccable reputation as a devoted husband and father. After a period of intense mourning, he sought solace in the company of Edith Bolling Galt, the widow of a

prominent businessman. Unfortunately for Wilson, public opinion turned against him due to rumors suggesting that he and his lover had conspired to poison his late wife.

Eventually, the couple got married and public opinion changed once more, this time greatly in favor of President Wilson's new wife and their marriage. In 1919, Wilson suffered a stroke that left him partially paralyzed, leading Edith to assume many of his daily responsibilities as part of her self-proclaimed presidency stewardship. On December 28, 1961, the same day as Wilson's 105th birthday anniversary, Edith passed away. Moving forward in time, we have the scandal surrounding John F. Kennedy. From 1961 to 1963, during his presidency, he was notorious for his reputation as a womanizer.

The list contained numerous well-known names such as Marilyn Monroe, Jayne Mansfield, Angie Dickinson, stripper Blaze Starr, and Judith Campbell Exner, who was the lover of reputed Mafia boss Sam Giancana. According to University of Virginia government professor Larry Sabato in his book Feeding Frenzy, these are just a few of the famous paramours that JFK has been linked to. Additionally, there were many anonymous airline stewardesses, secretaries, and aides involved. According to various reliable accounts, John F. Kennedy was not King Arthur but the Sir Lancelot of his presidency in Camelot.

Other presidential scandals, like Richard Mulhouse Nixon's during his term from 1969 to 1974, were not of a sexual nature. However, the course of American history was altered when five individuals were apprehended inside the Watergate hotel's Democratic National Committee headquarters on June 17, 1972. This break-in investigation uncovered a complex network of political espionage and sabotage, ultimately leading to the downfall of the Nixon presidency.

Around 40 government officials were indicted and the 37th president of the United States resigned as a result.

In the 1980s, Nixon's reputation in international affairs improved. However, the release of over 200 hours of tapes from the Nixon White House in 1997 cast another shadow on his complex presidential legacy. As of today in 1998, we are experiencing a contemporary scandal of our own. Yet, there is a fundamental difference between modern-day presidential scandals and those in the past – publicity. According to James W. Davis, author of The American Presidency, except for Cleveland's paternity case and recent allegations against Bill Clinton, scandals involving love affairs by presidents have historically emerged after they occurred.

In the pre-Watergate era, tongue-wagging was reduced as the press honored White House privacy, marking a distinct period. American views on presidential scandals may have also changed in the late 1990s.

According to Larry Berman, a political science professor at the University of California, Davis, Americans may now differentiate between the president's public actions and his personal life. Berman suggests that voters acknowledge the president's imperfections as a human being, just like everyone else. In Berman's view, it resembles an ongoing soap opera akin to the television show Melrose Place. Meanwhile, Shirley Anne Warshaw, an associate professor of political science at Gettysburg College and author of The Domestic Presidency, argues that perceptions of the presidency changed with the establishment of the independent counsel's office in 1978. Warshaw highlights that the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal is based solely on leaked information and asserts that society has been interested in investigating officials on a different level since Watergate. The Clinton sex scandal provides all necessary evidence.

The

story is ideal for online media due to its complexity, rapid development, and public interest. It attracted a massive audience online, surpassing the traffic generated by the Princess Diana's death at Fox News Online and outpacing the Super Bowl 3-to-1 at AP Online.

CNN Interactive experienced a dramatic increase in traffic by ten times in a single day. The Washington Post's website was also impacted heavily and had to accommodate additional servers. However, it should be noted that the accuracy of online news was often debated, with many claiming that the coverage was at best reckless. Nonetheless, it is widely acknowledged that the Web played a crucial role in driving the media frenzy. This was achieved by web news organizations capitalizing on their five advantages: 1.

The news can be delivered instantly instead of waiting for the printing of the newspaper. Furthermore, there is no need for the news to go through the processes of being videotaped, edited, and aired; it can simply be posted on a server.

If you can't include all the details, simply link to another page. Additionally, there are no expenses for newsprint, delivery trucks, newsstands, or TV studios.

No available satellites for rental. Additionally, there is interactivity through newsgroups, chat rooms, and other discussion forums that provide an immediate platform for sharing thoughts and ideas.

And an audience. 5. Open all night. It's never too late to share breaking news on the Internet. For instance, individuals can express their viewpoints on specific matters, allowing others to read and respond.

A woman responded to an editorial article on the Internet about the Clinton scandal and expressed her surprise at herself for engaging

with a website. She acknowledged that the Internet excelled in quickly obtaining and reporting the story. However, she questioned when the nation started following Roman Greco Law, assuming guilt until proven innocent. She believed that the country traditionally upheld Common Law, but the current tabloid mindset seemed to discard this principle.

I express my disappointment towards all forms of news media in this country. Will the truth, even if it is not sensational, be widely spread through every available media platform? I have doubts. Is the truth known only by the President and Ms. Lewinsky? Is it even our concern? Just a question. I appreciate the valuable service you provide, as I visit your site daily. Please don't waste my precious time by promoting this media through scandal.

This media can confidently stand on its own. However, for Web news to reach a global standard, it must address a few drawbacks. Firstly, visuals are a key area where television has the upper hand, mainly due to the limitations of streaming technology. Secondly,

In order for online access to be successful, it must reach a critical mass. Additionally, credibility is essential.

The Internet needs to change its image as a platform for spreading unsubstantiated information. The past few weeks have been filled with excitement for the country. Ever since news of the supposed President Clinton/Monica Lewinsky alliance broke, the public has been inundated with scandalous coverage of the highest caliber. 24-hour news networks, print media, and the Internet have all been employed to assist the public in navigating through the scandalous details of the Clinton sex scandal.

Since the start of the coverage, it has been

perceived as a major opportunity for the media to go after Clinton. Criticized by the Right for not investigating the Clinton Administration more during past scandals, the media now appeared to be attacking Clinton. Various explanations were offered, but the most prominent one was that the President's previous adept handling of scandals had infuriated the press. However, with accusations of real presidential dishonesty and revelations about previous dishonesty to the press regarding the Jennifer Flowers affair and marijuana usage, the press was not going to go easy on the President.

The accusations of lying to the media and the American people appear to be quite plausible claims. Clinton (along with Vice-President Gore) is known for being cunning and enjoys playing the game of literal truth. This is particularly evident in his explanation of his statements during the notorious 1992 60 Minutes interview. During that time, he denied allegations of having an eleven-year affair with Gennifer Flowers, yet acknowledged that he had previously caused harm to his marriage. However, in his deposition for the Paula Jones trial, he confessed to having had the affair.

It is clear without a formal logic training that the two statements are contradictory. Clinton's explanation demonstrates his skill in stating the facts as they are. It appears that he denied having an affair with Flowers for eleven years because the affair was not actually eleven years old. To most of us, this seems like he is evading the main point of the question. Typically, when someone asks about the existence of an eleven-year affair, they are questioning whether the affair occurred, not specifically the duration. Clinton remains factually accurate but avoids addressing the

actual question at hand...

Clinton is not the first person to play the literal truth game, as we have all likely done it at some point. However, when caught, it is perceived as dishonesty. The press has reason to be annoyed with Clinton, as he has consistently played this game for six years, only telling the literal truth at best and using them at worst. Therefore, it is understandable why the media is relentlessly pushing on this current scandal involving Clinton.

Despite thinking that exposing White House misconduct would damage President Clinton's reputation, it is evident that they were mistaken. Regardless of the numerous investigative reports aired by CNN, the scandal involving Lewinsky remains relatively insignificant. While the press hypocritically criticizes Clinton's morals, they are to blame for the public's lack of interest, as their excessive coverage has contributed to the problem. The repercussions of the Lewinsky affair for Clinton can be divided into two distinct issues: his moral transgressions and the potential obstruction of justice and perjury. The former, pertaining to his affair with Lewinsky, garners significantly higher ratings.

Surely, the sordid details of Clinton and Lewinsky's relationship during their passionate encounters are more intriguing to the public than their subsequent conversations. This explains why media coverage of the Lewinsky affair primarily revolves around questions about the sexual allegations. However, the significant issues at hand are perjury and obstruction of justice, which garner genuine public attention. Polls reveal that the public is unconcerned about the sexual charges and believes that if Clinton lied, he should face consequences, but if it is merely an affair, it is not significant. Consequently, the resulting media focus fails to persuade the

American people.

The demand for sex from market forces is not taken seriously by the public, therefore Clinton is not significantly affected by the sexual allegations. While there are potentially more serious charges known to the public, they have not been given the attention they deserve. It is important to distinguish between the sexual allegations, which are likely to be true and provable, and the perjury and obstruction charges, which may be difficult for investigators to prove. Clinton's supporters will need to address several key facts in order to create a coherent narrative in which Lewinsky and Clinton did not have any sexual relations. For example, why did it take so long for the President to deny these relations? What is the explanation for the extensive recorded conversations between Lewinsky and Linda Tripp? And most importantly, why did Lewinsky visit the White House 37 times after being transferred to the Pentagon due to concerns about her attempts to get close to the President? The current efforts to clear the President of these sexual allegations all share distinct similarities.

The text discusses various elements that are related to the controversy surrounding President Clinton. These include ad hominem attacks on Kenneth Starr and Linda Tripp, praises of the Clinton presidency, and rumors of a right-wing conspiracy against the President. However, these aspects are not directly relevant to the core inquiry into Clinton's actions.

The President's defenders have been more focused on attacking Clinton's accusers rather than disproving their allegations, which is quite revealing. The sexual charges have received a lot of media attention, but it will only benefit Starr if they provide links to other allegations of misconduct. There is

a genuine concern that the complex questions involved in these matters may devolve into legal discussions that people will not listen to, or even worse, not care about. This leads to the question of whether the press will cover these charges with the same level of diligence as they have done with the sexual issues. There is some indication that the press will not hesitate to investigate these matters; in fact, in some instances, it seems that many in the press have already drawn conclusions based on weak evidence.

The Dallas Morning News, for instance, broke the news about certain Secret Service officials being summoned to testify about their knowledge of the President's personal affairs. However, they later discovered that some crucial details in their story were not entirely accurate. Instances of such reporting errors should not happen, especially in this case where the press has a special responsibility to refrain from publishing false allegations due to the sensitive nature of the subject. Nevertheless, previous challenges like Presidential denials and disavowals, increasing criticism from the Left, and potentially declining ratings may result in a situation where important issues are not covered. This has previously occurred with matters like Whitewater and campaign finance violations, and it could occur again in this case. This is where conservatives (including Republicans) play an important role. At present, the Right has wisely chosen to remain silent, allowing Clinton to face criticism from his own party.

The objective in the upcoming weeks for the Right should not be to directly criticize Clinton but rather to observe the unfolding events and ensure that the media stays determined in seeking answers. The indications are

that the public is more concerned about the accusations of perjury and obstruction; although they may be captivated by the news, it does not carry as much significance in forming their opinion on Clinton's outcome. The Right must make an effort to provide the public with pertinent information. Shows such as Access Hollywood and Extra revolve around the personal lives of famous individuals.

Now, the focus is shifted to Bill Clinton and his trial regarding a sex scandal. Rather than prioritizing high ratings, it is vital for media outlets to consider the impact they have on the American people and the potential harm it could cause. A significant portion of the population in the United States lacks education and believes whatever the media presents as absolute truth. Consequently, they base their opinions and actions on what the media promotes. Even if you try to watch television, you are bombarded with repetitive images of Monica Lewinsky, Paula Jones, Jennifer Flowers, and other significant individuals involved in the presidential scandal. The media failed to uncover any fresh evidence and instead spent weeks airing special reports that were mere speculation.

The well-known image of Bill Clinton hugging Monica Lewinsky conveyed a hidden message that it is acceptable for the American people to disrespect and dislike their leader. Despite these accusations, which should not be supported, Bill Clinton was elected twice to lead the most powerful country in the world and will continue to do so regardless. Presently, new stories emerge daily about different women accusing Bill Clinton of sexual misconduct. Although Bill Clinton can only provide limited evidence to prove his innocence and is probably not innocent, it does not

concern the American public as it does not affect his performance in the Oval Office (no pun intended). Although being a world leader attracts scrutiny, the media should not dwell on his every move and uncover secrets from his past.

The media has a responsibility to keep the public informed about the President's concerns that may potentially affect his abilities. Additionally, it is important to consider the rights of the victims.