Fox News personality Michelle Malkin recently had a guest -- a porn website operator who is taking pictures of legal aged girls and posting them on the internet. Love or hate Fox News you will get a great chuckle out of this clip. It's fair to suggest she is even more angry then Keith Olbermann is with the Bush Administration.
*clip thanks to Newshounds
This isn't the first time they have covered this story. Bill O'Reilly in June talked about this guy and they concluded that he was not breaking the law and that he is just a "skeezy guy", and that mothers should hide their children from him. They covered this story for an excuse to scroll half naked ladies across the FOX NEWS screen for 5 minutes. In my opinion, this is bullsh!%. It's no different then the Lesbian Gang story -- just an excuse to scroll the word "Lesbian" across the screen. What's better then getting people mad and horny at the same time?
Paris Hilton is apparently "Miss America" - um... you have to realize she is popular because of a porn video she made in 2003. Doug says he takes pictures of "young looking woman" because according to statistics younger looking woman sell more porn subscriptions, you see, I think Doug is just running a business. Paris Hilton was pretty young when her first Porn tape made the internet rounds. Sex Sells, the media knows that, Fox News obviously knows that. Human Trafficking stories don't sell, that is why main stream media doesn't bother covering them.
Try it out, think of the global problem with Human Trafficking (yes, it is a type of slavery), type it into Google News and you get 3,000 results, this is happening, all over the world. Now type in "Paris Hilton" and you get 28,000 results, most from North America. So the only story here is sex Sells on the Internet. Fox News will continue to run stories that give them an excuse to show pretty ladies, thus making them more entertaining. Entertainment. Even Michelle Malkin knows that, the video below is her most popular on Google.
Reader Comments ( Page 2 of 2)
16. LOL. The guy gave her the fingure at the end of the segment beautiful. Obviously they're 2 differnt woman with 2 differnt views. If the woman are willing then whats the problem. But human trafficing is a whole differnt story then a couple of porn sites that don't force anybody to do anything. I'm sorry but why the hell did those 2 porno bozos make the news anyways? This is stupid just because some journalist finds it sleezy or skeezy or whatever then I find nothing wrong if the woman are willing and not burtualy forced. Or if there was an invasion of privacy. And he obvioulsy pointed out that he wasn't photographing underaged girls. The interviewer sounds high maintances anyways. Like they say its a buisness but if there was human trafficing involved maybe I'd be a little more outraged at the couple. And I'm mostly refering to the first video. Its a free country! Now weather I want to look at porno is a whole another story but I believe if thats what they do to put food on the table then so be it. Why should I care if people want to strip for the whole world to see? Its wrong its immoral yadda yadda yawn... But I do believe human trafficers deserve to be put to justice.
seanpdizzle at 1:41AM on Jul 8th 2007
17. The sad part is that the interviewer may not like what the man does for a job but, her interview skills are really lacking professionalism. And I hate the fact the women always assume porn is always about some letcherous man talking advantage of a girl. I am a adult gay male and the porn I watch doesnt include women at all so they cant cry foul. So the interviewer needs to grow up and interview more like a professional, the audience will make up their own mind about the subject matter.
Bryan at 1:56AM on Jul 8th 2007
18. Referring to comment 9.
..."There are far worse things happening around the world than legal pornography?
Jack. Come on, now. Pornography has made its contributions to "far worse things happening around the world" for years. Why do you think so many women are being abducted and murdered? Hmmm?
Pornography was Ted Bundy's down fall. Jeffrey Dahmer viewed child pornography. As a result, society suffered. Its a big deal, Jack.
Gantt at 2:35AM on Jul 8th 2007
19. So what? What the guy is doing still sucks. Everything sucks. So why bother?
Ryuuku at 2:43AM on Jul 8th 2007
20. Actually, I think the point of all of this is to say that mainstream porngraphy, and the idea of "human traficing" falls under the same idea. And, to an extent, I think it does. Sex is something natrual and one would suppose "wonderful" but like many other things in this world, it can be perverted and twisted.
Ryuuku at 2:45AM on Jul 8th 2007
21. Talk about a Nancy Grace wanna-be. It's obvious that when someone has a legitimate point and the interviewer does not agree with it they cut them off avoiding any debate.She is a hypocritical no talent with a few looks that otherwise would have no chance to be on TV.
Tim z. at 1:02PM on Jul 9th 2007
22. I think the worst thing these young girls are doing is if they ever make anything of themselves this will be used against them. They may have to explain it to there children. Why mommy felt the need to show her tits on the web. I know many others who have been hurt by money grubbers that keep this information till they can make some dough on it.
cassiestew at 1:44PM on Jul 9th 2007
23. Ok, so let me get this straight. The guy has women who send him pictures of themselves topless or whatever, then he posts them on the internet and he's a monster? Then, because he uses mainly women who look young and fresh (read, about 18-20) he's now a pedophile? It's like when those girls do "Girls Gone Wild" then people talk about how the camera guys take advantage of them being so drunk. Please, they see the camera, they are wearing the shirt, they know what is going on when they accept the free drinks. Same thing here, the girls are the ones sending in the pictures, they've obviously seen the site, they know what is going on and they apparently have no problem with it. The 5 million dollar question though (since I don't watch Fox News because I prefer to get actual news, not some BS fluff or watch someone get attacked on national television by a "journalist,) how did O'Reilly (if I misspelled it, forgive me) find the site out of all the other porn sites on the internet in the first place? Even if a production assistant is who found it, he apparently looked at it to see what was going on. It's like that trucker that was arrested (I believe in GA) a few years back who had all this kiddie porn in his cab. He said it made him so mad to look at it, that he would be up all night. It makes Fox News so angry, they have to do not one but two stories about it. As for this woman, come on, if you're going to interview someone, ask THEM the questions, or at least pretend that you're listening to the answers. I feel sorry for the guy for being attacked like that on TV, but more power to him for finding a niche if he can support himself with the income.
Felix at 3:17PM on Jul 9th 2007