http://historynewsnetwork.org/articles/article.html?id=149



Now’s a Good Time to Remember Richard Jewell


By Leonard Steinhorn

Largely because the Chandra Levy case involves the words “intern” and
“sex,” the press has begun to make the inevitable comparisons between Rep.
Gary Condit and former President Bill Clinton. But a more apt comparison for
Condit may be Richard Jewell.

Jewell was the security guard at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics who alerted
authorities to a suspicious knapsack, hurried people away from it, probably
saved a number of lives – and then, for 88 days, found himself not only the
prime suspect of the FBI investigation into the bombing but the subject of
withering media scrutiny that all but tried and convicted him.

As seems to be happening with Condit, media coverage of Jewell took on a life
of its own, all out of proportion to the facts and evidence of the case.
Playing the role of judge, jury and psychologist, the press turned Jewell
into a caricature of a “lone bomber,” a pudgy guy who lived with his mom
and, according to unnamed sources, seemed zealous in performing his security
duties and overly eager for a law enforcement career.

In Jewell’s case, the press strung together circumstantial scraps of
information and shaped them to fit a narrative story line about the type of
person the media presumed to be guilty.

“Jewell fits the profile of a lone bomber,” the Atlanta Journal and
Constitution wrote days after the bombing. “This profile generally includes a
frustrated white man who is a former police officer, member of the military
or police ‘wannabe’ who seeks to become a hero.” An intoxicated NBC News
dragged the narrative even further, saying there was “probably enough to
convict him.”

Jewell, of course, never was arrested, but that didn’t stop the press from
hounding him, staking out his home, turning him into a prisoner of reckless
innuendo, and treating him like a pathetic guest on the Jerry Springer show.
As it turned out, Jewell’s sole connection with the bombing was purely
circumstantial: he happened to be there doing his job.

Judging from police statements and available evidence, Condit’s connection
with Levy’s disappearance seems to be similarly incidental: he was having an
affair with her but appears removed from the actual circumstances of what
happened to her. According to the police, he is not now and never has been a
suspect. He dissembled about his affair with Levy to hide his marital
infidelity, but with his indiscretion now public he has apparently come clean
with – and satisfied – the police.

Yet these facts seem to matter little to the press these days, and the media
feeding frenzy about Condit’s relationship with Levy has mushroomed far
beyond his involvement in the case.

Reporters are staking out his Washington apartment, his California home, and
both his Capitol Hill and district offices. He’s the new headline grabber,
the hot subject on every political talk show, red meat for all the pious
pundits who gain fame and fortune from these public scandals.

His personal life is open game for the tabloids and the serious press as
well. An unproven and somewhat dubious allegation of another affair even made
the front-page of the usually staid Washington Post. Rumor, allegation,
insinuation abound about what he did and when he did it. Talk show
journalists psychoanalyze his motives, behavior, and character.

The emerging media narrative is an archetypal Washington scandal: a powerful,
ambitious politician who acts solely out of cold self-interest and has what
Geraldo Rivera calls “a real dark secret life.” If he’s “prone to act in
certain ways,” as a USA Today reporter put it, then who knows where it could
lead. Speculation morphs into news, and the underlying media murmur – without
any foundation in fact – has Condit somehow involved in Levy’s disappearance.

Condit is no Jewell in one sense: he lied about his affair with Levy, which
may have hindered the police early on. But assuming he had no other
connection with her disappearance, then Condit – like Jewell – has become
yet another bystander whose personal life has been ripped open by a media
twister fueled by ratings and our thirst for scandal. Turning someone’s
private life into a public soap opera may be entertaining. But it’s not
journalism and shouldn’t be news.

Gary Condit is living his private hell right now. He’s faced with his
character flaws, his shattered marriage, and the knowledge that a woman he
evidently liked if not loved – Chandra Levy – is possibly dead. But that’s
the point – it’s his private hell, and unless there’s a compelling need to
report it, the press should simply back off.







Reply via email to