Erin Andrews ESPN reporter nude video

[ABM]

.....I already admitted somewhere else in this thread that her knowing about it took all the fun out of it for me....

From: Newsweek Blog

..Privacy, it seems, is the new nudity. This is why, when Jennifer Aniston poses topless for the cover of GQ magazine no one does more than shrug, but when paparazzi catch her sunbathing topless, its tabloid fodder for weeks. Same with Britney Spears. Same with Janet Jackson. It’s not so much a desire to see nudity as it is to see candor, to see what the person looks like when she’s unaware she’s being watched. It’s the impulse behind “Stars: They’re Just Like Us,” and Gawker Stalker. It’s voyeurism, pure and simple. No matter how much access a celebrity gives us—posing naked, appearing on a reality TV show, revealing her deepest secrets in an interview—we’re more interested in whatever part she wants to keep to herself, no matter how tiny or inconsequential. It’s as though in some sense we’re suffering from so much celebrity over-exposure, the only time we’re truly interested in watching is when they don’t want us to look.

In statements from ESPN spokespeople, Andrews has asked the press respect her privacy. What she doesn’t understand is that’s the thing we want most.....

 

[PapaG]

Do you think I am wacko because I always click on links out of curiousity? There was a teenage girl killed in a Porsche in California a couple of years ago and the pictures of the crash site got onto the internet.

People warned not to click the link if you had a weak stomach but I just had to do it almost as if it were a dare.

I still wish I hadn't, I will never forget what I saw. I know that people have to see stuff like that every day as part of their jobs and I think they are underpaid now, no matter what kind of money they make.

On the other hand, I have more of a stomach for stuff like that now and it might pay off in an emergency..who knows?

No, you clearly thought about actually viewing the video, and it appears you had some doubts as to whether you should do so. I was mainly posting about the many posters who failed to show even a bit of concern for the victim of this crime...and it is a crime.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Not a parent, eh barfo? You'd understand my post if you were.

I agree with PapaG- I didn't and wouldn't watch that video. It's as disgusting as it is disturbing. Personally, I think people who watch it are every bit a peeping perv as the person who shot it.

As to it being an inside job, always possible. I had the Wendy's finger in the bowl of chili claim, and it was obvious it was a scam from the first day.

 

[bodyman5001]

I agree with PapaG- I didn't and wouldn't watch that video. It's as disgusting as it is disturbing. Personally, I think people who watch it are every bit a peeping perv as the person who shot it.

As to it being an inside job, always possible. I had the Wendy's finger in the bowl of chili claim, and it was obvious it was a scam from the first day.

No way. If I had done the taping I wouldn't have put it on the internet.

If she never knew it happened, it couldn't hurt her.

 

[BoBoBREWSKI]

Update on the situation:

http://donchavez.com/blog/2009/07/22/erin-andrews-peephole-video-now-with-map/

 

[Tyler_Hansbrough]

but I'm guessing that most of America has not watched the video, nor do they care to watch the video knowing how it was filmed.

Yeah right. I bet you are wrong. I would bet that 95 of every 100 people who saw this link watched it. You are crazy if you think that most of America has not watched the video.

You creep me out man...

 

[ABM]

Yeah right. I bet you are wrong. I would bet that 95 of every 100 people who saw this link watched it. You are crazy if you think that most of America has not watched the video.

You creep me out man...

It's kinda fuinny....Dwight Jaynes said he viewed the video....but then proceeded to chastise all the aspects of the making of it during his (BFT fill-in) show.

 

[PapaG]

Yeah right. I bet you are wrong. I would bet that 95 of every 100 people who saw this link watched it. You are crazy if you think that most of America has not watched the video.

You creep me out man...

The fact that you think that over 51% of Americans have watched the video is creepy.

You creep me out man...

 

[BoBoBREWSKI]

Update:
http://donchavez.com/blog/2009/07/2...her-victims-the-inside-job-theory/#more-18291

 

[BrianFromWA]

Yeah right. I bet you are wrong. I would bet that 95 of every 100 people who saw this link watched it. You are crazy if you think that most of America has not watched the video.

You creep me out man...

I'd like to take that bet. Though it's a bit unfair, now. You couldn't get 95 of 100 people on this site to click on the link already set up for them, but you're thinking that a higher percentage of people in America are going to pull up a computer, surf for "Erin Andrews Nude", find a link, click on it, and watch it? Unless I missed it, and it was on all three alphabet's Prime-Time news, CNN and Fox every 5 minutes. And even then, I'm relatively sure I could come up with 15M Americans who haven't seen it (and won't, for whatever reason).

Not shockingly, I'm solidly in PapaG's corner on this one. If you want to see nudity on the internet, there are more than a couple places to go. Heck, there are R-rated movies that you can rent if you want to see some T&A from women who are willingly showing it to you. IMHO, peeping through a keyhole and taping someone is wrong and should be punished. Thankfully, the law seem to agree with me.

On a tangent, it's my understanding that someone who knowingly buys a stolen item is able to be legally charged with a crime. Is there a reason why there wouldn't be a similar law for knowingly viewing illegally-garnered "invasion of privacy" video? Any of the law professionals on here knoew?

 

[Colonel Ronan]

Of course it's wrong, but why would that stop my curiosity? Smoking and drinking underage is wrong but who honestly stayed completely clean when they were under 21?

 

[BrianFromWA]

<--this guy. Partially because it was more important for me to have the discipline to meet my goals than to be "curious". I don't feel I missed out on a whole lot. I understand how that's not really something a lot of teenagers buy into, however.

 

[Colonel Ronan]

Meh, it was different in the 1940s.

 

[Ed O]

Of course it's wrong, but why would that stop my curiosity? Smoking and drinking underage is wrong but who honestly stayed completely clean when they were under 21?

I was completely clean when I was under 21. I'm glad I was, too, because there's plenty of time for me to try stuff now that I'm more emotionally mature. Not that I'm emotionally mature objectively right now. Just more than I was when I was that age.

Ed O.

 

[ABM]

I was completely clean when I was under 21. I'm glad I was, too, because there's plenty of time for me to try stuff now that I'm more emotionally mature. Not that I'm emotionally mature objectively right now. Just more than I was when I was that age.

Ed O.

I still chuckle at your standing-in-the-window-in-your-skivvies routine.

 

[Ed O]

I still chuckle at your standing-in-the-window-in-your-skivvies routine.

Oh, man. So much to chuckle at in my life. Lots to wince at, also. But much chuckling.

Ed O.

 

[Colonel Ronan]

I was completely clean when I was under 21. I'm glad I was, too, because there's plenty of time for me to try stuff now that I'm more emotionally mature. Not that I'm emotionally mature objectively right now. Just more than I was when I was that age.

Ed O.

Bullshit.