A NEW YORK POST reporter flew to Nevada to spend the night with Markus, a 25-year old ex-Marine whom the Post is billing as the first ever legal male prostitute. She even paid the $500 tab for his services.Here is a bit of her story:
“So,” Markus says after leaning over and kissing my knee, “we’re going to get undressed and then take a shower. Then we can both inspect each other to make sure there are no discrepancies.”
Minutes later, as we’re standing naked in the shower, he’s examining me like a second-rate gynecologist and nodding.
“Yeah,” he murmurs, cooing that I’m “practically” an 8 or a 9. “Everything looks great down there.”
Oh. My. God.
Is there anything wrong with the journalist engaging (no pun intended) in the story like this? Isn't it just Gonzo journalism as made popular by the likes of Hunter S. Thompson?Or is there something sketchy about a journalist getting involved in something like this? Would you report this story?
By the way, the reporter writes that she did not have sex with the dude.
22 comments:
Yeah... this seems more than a little dependent on shock value. But, I mean, I'm reading it right now... whatever works, right?
I mean wow..thats all I can say. She definitely got her story that's for sure, but could of ended on a worse note.
I think that she was definately going for the shock value, i mean it made for an interesting story but, i think she went too far. She could have just sat down and interviewed him.
I think it is good to have a journalist be involved in a story. The shock value on this is just vulgar and not something that I would ever want to be a part of or read about. ew. I think Gonzo journalism might work for some situations, not for this- just interview him, I think we'll get the picture.
This would be very entertaining to read. I think it's a wise choice to print this, it catches people's eye.
I love Hunter S. especially Rum Diaries (his only novel) but I just can seem to agree with what this journalist did. She wanted to get a story but implemented erself into where she kind of tainted it. Seems less credible plus this guy Markus or whatveer went on 60 minutes ors omething.. He's a tool ..this is just for publicity i feel.
I just don't see what the story is.
If this is just Gonzo journalism, then maybe she should just be a Gonzo journalist? Just a thought. I'm not too familiar with the New York Post but judging from what I've just browsed on the site, this kind of story doesn't seem to not fit in. NYPost seems to be like celebrity gossip site and this kind of story isn't so unusual for sites like these, but it definitely would not be appropriate for any real news site or show as then, a journalist getting involved in a story would NOT be appropriate. Tabloids and gossip columns push limits and so I think this story is okay for NYPost.
With a character like Markus an interview wouldn't have extracted the information she wanted from him. By getting slightly more personal she coaxed more information out of him. He is apparently the "first" legal male prostitute and that makes a great story for the post. All though she spent more subjective time with him if she truly didn't have sex with Markus then she was keeping it objective by observing how he was going about the business he is at the forefront of.
This story definitely has an entertaining aspect for some, as sad as that may sound. I think its more interesting when a journalist gets involved in their story- it shows that they want to get the best they can for their readers. BUT I also find this story a little difficult to accept as hard work. Although she claims that she didn't sleep with him I think she took the detail apspect of the story a little too far-especially because the story has little significance, its just funny to read. I feel like anyone can get involved with any story they want as long as they do it with pride. It is just as difficult to collect information as it is to write it. I feel that the kind of information she revealed for her viewers isn't anything that is seen as respectful.
How far are we willing to go before there becomes a thin line of respect between the reporter him/herself and the situation as a whole?
I think that whether I agree or not if this story should have been followed, the fact is that this type of journalism still exists today, and for many, is the reason why journalism has become so increasingly popular. So many people want to bash the media, but at the same time want to buy the us weekly's and all of the other celebrity gossip columns, and only when they themselves somehow become mixed up in it or become truly insulted by some particular story do they then react negatively to it all. I must admit that I thrive on my weekly entertainment fixes, whether online or through magazines, but many times I become insulted by so many of the stories that are published, but I take them with a grain of salt and soak it up to being modern day entertainment and the media in journalism. So should this story have been published? Maybe yes, maybe no. Did the journalist sleep with the man? Probably. But for now it does not look as though it is going to change anytime soon.
I feel like this was a very bold story, It is an entertaining story, but at the same time how is the journalist making herself looking?
Ummm...okay he's a male prostitute. That's not really surprising. What does the story have to do with current events besides that it's just interesting that he's a male dude and a prostitute. What is she trying to prove?
It read like a tabloid story. It was interesting, yes, but it was garbage. I think it's irritating when people defend this as journalism, even if it is, by definition.
I agree with Dan P. I sat here reading the article and I just...don't understand how this is a story. Am I missing something?
Sketchy or not? As a reporter maybe not, I think this falls more on your morals as a person. I personally think it's questionable either way. Wouldn't want to be her significant other...
This story made her seem trashy, I wouldn't want to read anything by her after this. There's a limit, we all know what sex is, there's no reason for her to engage in it like she did. She could have interviewed him, or watch him spend a night out with someone else, her involvement makes her bias, therefore not credible.
The excerpt that is posted is creepy, I can only imagine what the rest of the story is like.
What DID she do with her time with this gigalo for 500$ if she didn't have sex with him? Just a naked shower and some creepy exchange? I'd say this journalist is exploiting herself and I'd never get naked for a guy because I had nothing better to write.
Ridiculous.
Whoever that woman is clearly has lost some sense of morality (if she ever had it to begin with). Yikes! That was a little harsh. But nothing in comparison to the moves she has made. All I know is that is some real risky and expensive business.
I think this was a really interesting story and that it was definitely done for the shock value. Appearing on the front page of the paper, it is clearly being used as a way to sell the paper. Although it was interesting, I think the story could have been done without having the woman actually pay the $500 for whatever it is that went on during their time.
ridiculous! is she serious!?
i mean, no i actually don't mean anything, i don't know how to react or respond to this. ew, just ew.
I think she just had a crush on him because I understand wanting to found out things for her job but she took it a little far in my opinion. They may be boyfriend and girlfriend!
Post a Comment