Do you ever feel like you know just enough about to be dangerous? Let's see if we can fill in some of the gaps with the latest info from experts.Once you begin to move beyond basic background information, you begin to realize that there's more to than you may have first thought.
Former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's whopping breach of marital ethics has touched off a curious ethical dilemma in the media world: In reporting the ongoing fallout from Schwarzenegger's affair with the former housekeeper who gave birth to his child, has the press unduly invaded the privacy of Schwarzenegger's one-time paramour?
Some major news organizations have exercised restraint, declining to publish the names, photos or any other revealing details about the housekeeper and her son. Bill Keller, executive editor of The New York Times, which published the woman's name on Wednesday, has an answer.
"Our basic job is to inform readers about news events, so we need a pretty compelling reason NOT to give readers information we think they care about," Keller told the Los Angeles Times' James Rainey. Russ Stanton, editor of the Los Angeles Times, which broke the Schwarzenegger scandal late Monday night, sees things differently.
We hewed to the principle of protecting the identify of an innocent child. To have identified the mother would, in effect, have been to identify the child. CNN made the call to run with the woman's name--Mildred Baena, for the record, as well as her photo following the New York Times report. Other television outlets, including ABC News, CBS News and Fox News, also put Baena on display Wednesday and Thursday, as did various online sources, including the Huffington Post and Yahoo!.
The Associated Press published Baena's name only after it had been floated by multiple news outlets. (Radar was the first to report her name, according to the AP.) An arrow actually points to Baena's abdomen."
Knowing enough about to make solid, informed choices cuts down on the fear factor. If you apply what you've just learned about , you should have nothing to worry about.
Once you begin to move beyond basic background information, you begin to realize that there's more to than you may have first thought.
Former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's whopping breach of marital ethics has touched off a curious ethical dilemma in the media world: In reporting the ongoing fallout from Schwarzenegger's affair with the former housekeeper who gave birth to his child, has the press unduly invaded the privacy of Schwarzenegger's one-time paramour?
Some major news organizations have exercised restraint, declining to publish the names, photos or any other revealing details about the housekeeper and her son. Bill Keller, executive editor of The New York Times, which published the woman's name on Wednesday, has an answer.
"Our basic job is to inform readers about news events, so we need a pretty compelling reason NOT to give readers information we think they care about," Keller told the Los Angeles Times' James Rainey. Russ Stanton, editor of the Los Angeles Times, which broke the Schwarzenegger scandal late Monday night, sees things differently.
We hewed to the principle of protecting the identify of an innocent child. To have identified the mother would, in effect, have been to identify the child. CNN made the call to run with the woman's name--Mildred Baena, for the record, as well as her photo following the New York Times report. Other television outlets, including ABC News, CBS News and Fox News, also put Baena on display Wednesday and Thursday, as did various online sources, including the Huffington Post and Yahoo!.
The Associated Press published Baena's name only after it had been floated by multiple news outlets. (Radar was the first to report her name, according to the AP.) An arrow actually points to Baena's abdomen."
Knowing enough about to make solid, informed choices cuts down on the fear factor. If you apply what you've just learned about , you should have nothing to worry about.
