How much privacy are public officials entitled to?

      It's a juicy story, no doubt.  A well-known state assemblyman confesses to having an extramarital affair.  Meanwhile, a state panel is investigating whether he violated ethics rules.  And local blogs are abuzz with e-mails that may come from the assemblyman and his lover.  The assemblyman is locked in a heated re-election campaign and allegations of dirty politics are all part of the mix.

     How well is The Buffalo News handling the Sam Hoyt story about his alleged affairs with Legislature staff members?  Are we giving it about enough coverage?  Is it the right kind of coverage? Should it even be the subject of news stories at all?

     Read News Editor Margaret Sullivan's column in the Viewpoints section for a discussion of the issues surrounding media coverage of the private lives of politicians -- especially their sex lives -- and let us know what you think.

Comments

[lanres]

Personaly I believe Elected Officials should be protected !- From each other ! Give them the same respect they and their "Election Committees" give anyone who challanges or questions them . People love slinging mud , until it sticks to their candidate. The two or three main Political Party's create "Psuedo Party's" to give the appearance they didnt throw the first mud-ball , they only created the means and funded the actions that caused it. Give them the same respect Sen Volker gave a voter in Lancaster who questionted the safety of a bridge - the Senator said:"How dare you , this is my Town and your embarrassing "ME!"

[Lloyd Marshall, Jr.]

In the public eye, you're under a micorscope. So, whatever notions of "privacy" you harbor... forget them.

[Lydia Bezou-Hojnacki]

As taxpayers and voters we have a right to demand that the people we pay (our employees) do their jobs for the good of the whole. Publicly funded individuals who SERVE the public SHOULD be unquestionably competent, ethical, and open with their constituents during the course of their working day. They should practice good manners and propriety when relaxing outdoors--shirts on, gentlemen, while cutting your grass! When inside their own homes, it's nobody's business unless there is domestic violence evident to the neighbors or shady-looking characters visit while the spouse is away.

If only our political campaigns centered on the candidates' qualities in leadership. Only then will we truly have the information to make good choices at the polls. I, for one, am sick of the negatives. Any wonder why so few Americans actually vote? We know next to nothing about candidates' strengths, and everything sleazy, whether true or false.

Is there ANY WORTHY CANDIDATE FOR ANY OFFICE? We are all human, and none of us is perfect; let's focus on experience and productivity in the candidate. Leave the private life private.

[BobbyCat]

Lydia said it all - Leave their private lives private.

BTW, these issues were resolved for most of the past 50 years. There is no need to re-examine the role of the media in private lives - They have no role. They should butt-out, unless state secrets are being compromised, etc.

It's the tabloid influence that makes even stuffy old papers like the BufNews become peeping tom purveyors of pulchritude.

Who's behind all this?, asks the Church Lady editorialists. Can you spell S-A-T-A-N?

Give it a rest. Adults behind closed doors,etc. Fugetabouttit!.

[Lloyd Marshall, Jr.]

"As taxpayers and voters we have a right to demand that the people we pay (our employees) do their jobs for the good of the whole. Publicly funded individuals who SERVE the public SHOULD be unquestionably competent, ethical, and open with their constituents during the course of their working day."

In the working world, behaving in such a manner as could be described of Mr. Hoyt or Slick Willie falls under "immoral and unethical conduct," and is more than likely grounds for dismissal.

They're on our dime, and on our time, and thus it does become our biz when they act in such a disgraceful manner.

Some say, "we need to get on with the people's business." When a public representative acts like this, the people's business gets compromised. In the work world, the operations of the company get compromised in situations like this. Just because someoone is a government figure of long tenure, that doesn't exempt them from dealing with the consequences the rest of us workaday stiffs have to face.

[DaveD]

Since we've been invited to comment here - and not directly on the editorial page - let's do it. Taken from context, and no, NOT out of context:

"Suddenly, the long era was over in which revered politicians such as the Kennedys and Franklin Delano Roosevelt could count on reporters to know about their extramarital dalliances and, with a wink and a nod, conceal them from the public.

"The story bubbled under the surface for a long time before it broke on The Buffalo News Web site on Tuesday evening and then in Wednesday’s print editions.

"The Hoyt story brings forth all sorts of challenging questions. When do rumors turn into legitimate news?

"Ultimately, two factors prompted us to go ahead with the Hoyt story. One was the assemblyman’s public statement, acknowledging only that he had, as he put it, broken his marriage vows.

"Second was the news that the State Legislature would investigate the matter to see if Hoyt had violated ethics policies on fraternizing with interns, rules that went into place in 2004.

"Given those developments, we felt the public had a right to know."

-----

Uh, I see. So until the cheater himself went public AND the announcement of an investigation, the public DID NOT have a right to know?

It's obvious that TBN knew of this long before they decided on the public's "right to know". Exactly how does this fit the definition of journalism?

My God. Let' be sure to frame that lack of serving your readership with a public servant's "right to privacy".

You've let us know where you stand - the right to an individual's privacy AND deciet (for something you obviously verified) takes priority over your readership's right to know.

Shame on you.

[Camino Reality]

Mullah Church Lady wants to run an Iran era Buffalo.

Let's talk about stained dresses at a raging bon fire in front of City Hall but not about how there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

There is nothing better to distract the attention of the citizens of Buffalo and the USA than a sex story to divert attention from real crimes against the humanity in this city, country and across the planet.

I learned lots of less than earth shattering details about Monica and the dress from the media but heard little for eight years about the state of the U.S. at war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

You want to report. Write about how and why Ralph Nader isn't being allowed to debate the Republican and Democrat candidates for President instead of this witch hunt on Sam Hoyt. Let's air the real dirty laundry about the control of the US by the corporation. Even Warren Buffet has said that the US tax system is unfair to the majority of American people.

Illuzzi is Buffalo's Carl Rove abd Gordon Liddy. They are all hatchet men for the corporate establishment.

There is nothing like making a political race based on sexual activity of candidates to make real issues seam meaningless.

If an elected official committs a crime in office that is news. If an elected official committs a sexual act with another consenting adult than that is not news and no Editor or publicists business.

Church lady needs to be kept out of the halls of government.

[Lloyd Marshall, Jr.]

"Church lady needs to be kept out of the halls of government."

If "Church Lady" is a taxpaying American citizen, then she has EVERY right to be in the halls of government!