Jack McClellan is one twisted dude. He’s the sicko who posts photos of children on his website, where he chronicles the best public places to stake out little girls, or “LGs.” While McLellan emphatically claims he’s never inappropriately touched a child, his obsessive public fantasizing certainly pushes the limits of the First Amendment, and demands extraordinarily close scrutiny from law enforcement officials.
McClellan is under a restraining order prohibiting him from loitering within 30 feet of minors, and as a father of an LG, news of McClellan’s arrest yesterday outside a UCLA child development center elicited no empathy from me. Yet I couldn’t help but notice the curious way the AP wire story was reported.
As of 9AM PST this morning, a quick Google News search found over 200 published articles on McClellan’s arrest, and in nearly every single one the headline refers to him as a “pedophile” or “admitted pedophile” or “self-described pedophile” as in the Los Angeles Times headline, “Pedophile arrested outside UCLA child development building.”
That is, every single headline except that in the Seattle Times, which had its own unique take on McClellan’s dangerous perversion: “Controversial blogger is arrested near children.”
“Oh no, a controversial blogger?” I thought, reading the headline, “Which of my trusted colleagues turned out to be a disgusting pervert? Hmm… Postman is down in California for a few days, perhaps it’s him?” But no, it turned out to be not a blogger at all, but rather a “self-proclaimed pedophile.”
Over two hundred other papers saw this wire story and described the perp as a pedophile, but to the fearful headline writers at the Seattle Times, McClellan’s most disturbing biographical detail is that he blogs. How many readers clicked on this misleading headline, expecting the juicy details of a well-known blogger brought down by scandal? I sure did. And how many righties turned away disappointed to learn the “blogger” in question wasn’t an evil netroots leader like Markos or Atrios or even a lesser local blogger like me?
To primarily describe McClellan as a “controversial blogger” would be like introducing Seattle Times publisher Frank Blethen as a “dog shooter.” In fact it’s worse, since blogging on its own is a neutral activity, whereas shooting your neighbor’s dog is both a heinous and criminal act.
That the Seattle Times would imply that McClellan’s infamy stems from his blogging rather than his pedophilia says something about the paper’s own fearful approach to new media competition. But it also provides a warning to which the blogging community should take heed: if the old media is willing to spin the arrest of pedophile into a headline about a fallen blogger, just imagine what they’ll do given the whiff of a real netroots scandal. No doubt there are some amongst the broader netroots community with skeletons in their closets or ethical and/or legal lapses in their future. As we gain readers and influence the media and political establishments will surely attempt to use their vast resources to defend their turf. And they won’t stop at misleading headlines.
Dog bites man, no story. Man bites dog, now that’s a story. Seattle Times writes dumb headline that slurs bloggers…
Goldy I agree that this is bullshit – this guy’s no blogger and the paper is worried about bloggers cutting into their income stream. That said, don’t you have bigger enemies and problems – like Dick Cheney trying to stop you from having the right to free speech?
Is the guy an actual pedophile? Or is he just a guy who has a fetish about little kids and hasn’t done any physical acts?
What do you expect from a newspaper owned by a rightwing anti-inheritance-tax nut who shoots dogs?
@3
That’s a good question and this is a very difficult topic that as Goldy says, somewhat tests the limits of free speech. I think the concern is that he could be enabling or encouraging criminal behavior by others even if he does not commit any direct criminal acts himself.
I think the goal of this kind of blogger/child molester linkage is that bloggers have ‘too much’ freedom of speech and need to be watched closely and limited as to what they can discuss.
Unless, of course, they have a corporate sponsor — like the pharmaceutical industry.
Ummm, He has a blog, right? He posts on his blog, right? Doesn’t that make him a blogger? No matter wht you call him, he is a piece of human trash.
Boy, you shoot one dog around here, and everyone acts like you’re a criminal…
Goldy, you have to admit that there are likely thousands (and maybe a couple of orders of magnitude more than that) of perverts like McClellan in the U.S. Just being a pedophile with a restraining order against him who gets arrested for violating it wouldn’t have even gotten him a little blurb in his own local paper, much less 200 articles around the country, unless there was something unique about him, like being a priest, or a politician, or a celebrity. In McClellan’s case, what made him unique was that he publicized his perversion on a web site/blog (was it actually a blog?). The fact that the Times calls out in their headline what it is that makes this particular pervert unique is not at all surprising.
You know, though, that I make note of the fact every time a news story highlights that a criminal is Mormon, even when it isn’t relevant to the story at all. They rarely mention when someone is a Baptist, or a Buddhist, or an atheist, but they do mention if they’re Mormon. Maybe it’s because when a Mormon does such things, it’s so out of the ordinary realm of expectation of Mormons that it’s worthy of attention. People don’t expect Mormons to do such things. In a kind of backhanded way, pointing out that a criminal is a Mormon is a compliment to other Mormons. And maybe instead of taking offense, Goldy, you could look upon this as a similar compliment — that a blogger who is also a pervert is so out of the ordinary that it is worthy of attention.
See? There’s bright side to everything.
People don’t expect Mormons to do such things.
I know too many Mormons to believe that.
9 TN
I think another salient feature was the man’s self-proclaimed pedophilia, which is, you know, kind of rare.
I have no idea what you’re talking about with this Mormon thing. I read a LOT of news from a lot of different sources, and I have not encountered what you describe.
In the case of Candidate Romney, in case you are referring, he has made several statements to the effect that we should have a “person of faith” in the White House, which not only indicates that IN HIS OPINION a person’s faith is an issue, but also the pandering to a conservative Christian base that is part and parcel of GOP electoral politics tends to bring up examinations of Romney’s faith by evangelical leaders and voters.
Outside of the above and the occasional polygamist, I have not seen what you describe.
that a blogger who is also a pervert is so out of the ordinary that it is worthy of attention.
TB – That makes no sense. Sex, deviance and porn being blogged is not out of the ordinary. The internet is the best thing that’s happened to that kind of stuff. The sex industry was profitable on the internet from day one.
The issue is that Seattle Times (who everyday gets more irrelevant) has framed bloggers as sexually deviant.
Goldy has been attacked by the right wing in this way since this blog started getting traction.
Now the local paper is stooping to this albeit in a plausibly deniable way. The motivation is clear to me.
Again I won’t give a dime to that fish wrapper. Never, ever, ever. The tax-dodging dog shooter should sell his share to McClatchy. Then I’m buying.
Is the pedophile picture-taking guy a Mormon or something? I seem to have missed it.
Sounds like a good, solid, contributing member of the famed Republican base.
CNN reports it as “Blogger arrested near UCLA child care center”
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law.....index.html
Was it the Great Orange Pedophile?
Waaa haaa haaa haaa haaa haaa haaa!!!!!!
The irony missed by the ASSWipers is this is Politically Correct Country. Being PCC, there are certain things “not said” publicly.
What’s the definition of a Pedophile? I can honestly say Stupidman is a Pedophile. Heck he accuses everyone who doesn’t think (term loosely used to describe that jerk) like him (thank goodness for that) of being baby rapers. Since that is always on his “mind” (term loosely used to describe that jerk) I declare Stupidman (post #2) is a Pedophile!
When family members ask me about the Northwest the only thing great is the scenery and the weather. Why does Rsh call this the left coast? PCC Lefties!
Waaa haaa haaa haaa haaa haaa haaa!!!!!!
Don’t know if they recently changed it, but the actual headline you have to click on to read the story is, “Pedophile arrested near children”….then the story itself has the other silly headline. Sheesh.
16 Pud
Wow, man, you should go into comedy as a professional. You’re just that funny. It’s incredible listening to you.
Nice straw man Pud, did you build it yourself?
I was about to write something profoundly nasty to you involving several other sexual perversions.
But then I realized the only reason you come here is to kick up shit and make people angry.
Have a nice day! Thank God you don’t live in Canada! If the Northwest hits you as being too left, Vancouver would make your head spin around three times.
16 Pud
You know, I don’t really even know what you’re trying to say. Are you trying to say that media sources don’t say “pedophile?” Because…ummm…they do, and that was kind of the point.
@3 Libertarian writes something more interesting:
Is the guy an actual pedophile? Or is he just a guy who has a fetish about little kids and hasn’t done any physical acts?
Well, let’s talk about other sexual kinks for a moment of the fun, healthy sort.
If you had fantasies about being covered in cherries and whipped cream and didn’t at least broach this with your partner, I’d say you have some communication problems.
If you like to administer a good spanking and can’t find a way to get your yah-yahs out in 2007, either through your regular partner, a club, or a professional, I’d say the repression of your desires is an aberration in and of itself.
McClellan does not fantasize about spankings, or being made into a banana split. He fantasizes about sex with little girls. One has to believe that if the opportunity presented itself, he would consummate this act.
We can’t throw people in jail just for thinking about things. But at the very least, I don’t want this guy walking around on the streets without a psychiatrist working through his problems.
As another parent of two little girls, I don’t really want him out on the streets at all, but again, we can’t jail people for thinking about things, no matter how heinous their thoughts are. I am happy he’s under arrest today.
Supposedly- Jack McCellan has no arrest record of any kind. He’s never been brought up on charges of molesting children. He was arrested because he violated a restraining order. Imagine that, a restraining order when you haven’t done anything illegal. Is this an example of the government going to far without cause?
@22
So should stalking be legal too? Are you saying that a woman shouldn’t be able to get a restraining order against a man if that man doesn’t have a criminal record?
Marvin,
Good question.
I am a big believer in due process.
McClellan was told that he could not be within 10 yards of children in the State of California. I know one could pick nits and say he was violating that if he went to the supermarket and got a gallon of milk (presumably he would be within 10 yards of a child at some point), but that’s not what happened.
He was arrested outside the playground of a day care center. This is exactly, ground zero, where he should not be.
Try a conscious exercise for the next 24 hours. Walk around town, and keep a respectful distance from schools, playgrounds, parks, and day care centers. You don’t have to be weird about it, just observe the 10 yard rule and go on with your day. If you find yourself walking next to a park, etc. cross the street. Simple.
I meet friends for a drink at a restaurant which sits right across from a park. I can do that and not violate the 10 yard rule.
I’ll do it if you do. I may have to explain to my daughters why I can’t go to the park or the pool with them, but for 24 hours, I think I can manage.
McClellan was given a not terribly onerous restriction. If you believe what you read in the newspaper, he then patently ignored that restriction.
If I started writing a blog where I plotted killing Marvin Stamn in great detail, noted Marvin’s whereabouts, and then pleaded that no, I haven’t actually killed Marvin, I have just thought about killing Marvin, and would never actually go through with it, I doubt I would be allowed to walk the streets (especially near you) in spite of pleading 1st Amendment rights.
Daddy Love @ 11:
Well, yeah, that’s kind of the point. If you are a member of the class being called out, you’re kind of sensitized to it, and if you’re not, you don’t even notice it. I think that’s kind of the situation Goldy’s in with bloggers. Unfortunately, I’m not even sure I can put my fingers on the examples I’m thinking of — the most recent would be several months ago.
#24 jsa on commercial drive says:
Yes he did violate the order. I don’t believe the order was valid. Restraining orders like this one set a bad precedent. In my opinion, this isn’t much different than hate crime legislation, it’s relying on someone’s interpretation of what he’s thinking.
If I was the dictator of the free world, his car would have accidently ran off the road on his way down from washington. Or a father of one of the girls he took pictures of would have taken care of him.
if you did, you would be the new best friend of roger rabbit, lee, headless lucy biker chick, chadt and quite a few others. But seriously… He said he knew he couldn’t act on his fantasies. I don’t know if he was serious but the law says innocent until proven guilty (unless you’re rove or bush).
I wouldn’t want him near my children, or nieces/nephews, maybe that’s why I keep an eye on them. I’m not as worried about him as I am the ones that aren’t so open about their fantasies, like priests, teachers, etc.
25 TN
Hey, thanks for the reply.
BUT, I don’t think that you are as overly sensitized or me so numb to the blatant Anti-Mormon Movement (we call it AMM) as you think.
David, a pretty easy search would have found plenty of examples of reputable news organizations all over the country that identified the suspect as a blogger. As one of your commenters point out, that’s what has made this guy a big story.
So unless you want to cast your conspiracy theory even wider, you should take comfort in the fact that in addition to the Seattle Times, other organizations that identified the suspect as a blogger include the NBC affiliates in San Diego and Sacramento, the San Jose Mercury, those known Goldy-haters at the International Herald Tribune, CNN, Pittsburgh PA’s WXPI, the Salinas Californian and the AOL blog that has been tracking the story and used the headline, “Blogging Pedophile Taunts Parents.”
Are you also worried about your employers at 710 KIRO? CBS, which provides the national news for the station’s website, used a double-decker headline on its story:
“Self-Described Pedophile Arrested In L.A.
“Man Who Blogs About His Attraction To Young Girls Had Been Near UCLA Day Care Center With Camera”
Get a grip, man.
26 MS
Weird as it seems, I agree.
I don’t think he should suffer legal sanctions, necessarily.
I don’t disagree with his Web host cutting off his site, which apparently advertised events at which little girls could be found. But he hasn’t done something bad illegal.
#29 Daddy Love says:
I don’t see it as weird! I believe all people are capable of learning and becoming more enlightened.
He’s been on the local news (I’m in los angeles) for weeks. The spots he listed weren’t secrets (parks, beaches, etc.), he just thought they had the cutest girls.
I’m all for his webshot shutting it down. I believe all private companies should be able to do as they wish.
He’s a liberal democrat.
Pedophilia is a pet cause of the left.
Democrats LOVE pedophiles.
The ACLU should defend him as the do NAMBLA.
Only liberals believe pedophiles are human.
#31 Typicallefty says:
Something I never understood… democrats believe pedophiles can be rehabilitated, but gays are born that way. Well except for bill richardson, he believes it’s a choice to be gay.
31 – 32
Right-wing mini circle jerk.
Something I never understood… democrats believe pedophiles can be rehabilitated, but gays are born that way.
Really? Do you have a link to back up that claim, or are you talking out of your vagina again?
31
Liberals believe that even conservatives are — well, may be — human.
I still remain troubled by stripping rights from someone who has not committed a crime or been judged a danger to himself or others under regular civil commitment proceedings.
In this case a judge has created a special set of rules for this one individual, who he and a bunch of other people find (rightly so) extremely offensive and scary.
BUT truth be told, the guy has suffered this loss of rights because of his BLOGGING of his pedophilia, not because of his thinking his pedophilia.
The warning here is against blogging about the unacceptable, not against hanging out at parks watching little girls.
Sidenote: our language doesn’t seem to have a word making a distinction between someone possessed by sexual attraction to children and someone who acts on those attractions in an illegal way. Both seem to come under the heading of “pedophile”. In that respect, both the headline types you describe can be misleading although accurate.
@36
Good thoughts. Thank you.
I think there are also some parallels to be drawn between this case and the case of the anti-choice folks who set up a website encouraging people to murder abortion doctors (and providing addresses, phone numbers, etc). There’s a certain concern over encouraging or promoting criminality as well, and that also blur the line of how absolute we can be when it comes to free speech.
18: I’m glad you think I funny.
I guess your good friend Stupidman makes you warm and fuzzy inside when he calls his political opponents baby rapers!
JSA – Navigate to the Drunkin Libtardly thread and see the words of Stupidman.
I rest my case!
@38
Oh, we’re not laughing with you.
@38 Indeed.
However, my take on this is that the guy’s primary issue is being a professional victim. Anybody who has gone as far out of his way as this dude has to be identified as a pedophile is certainly not rational in any sense that we define “rational”.
He makes everybody justifiably nervous, and, quite accidentally, raises a seriously debatable point: when does a proclivity unaccompanied by an discernible activity to fulfill that proclivity become a crime, if ever.
He’s so obvious and persistent at what he does that I think that’s the end in itself; and we’re engaging in a lot of uproar that begs some serious debate.
Is he a nut?
Yes.
Is he really a pedophile, or is this just a way to get a huge amount of attention for other ends?
Who can tell?
Is he getting what HE wants?
Almost certainly.
Is he a criminal?
#41
Well, he wasn’t a criminal, but he scared people, so a court and some citizens made up a special individualized crime for him to be guilty of.
More Thoughts:
For me, I think the most disturbing about this guy is his blogging and publicity encourage other, perhaps potentially less controlled, pedophiles to see their proclivities as just another hobby or misunderstood special interest group, making them feel they are more “normal” than they are. I don’t understand the psychology of it, but I figure there are probably quite a few closet pedophiles out there who could do without any encouragement to believe their self-restraint isn’t fully right and justified.
Normalizing pedophilia in any way or form, no matter how legal, just seems threatening.
His very public activities may be his own strange personal therapy, but it’s very disturbing.
I agree with all the above. I think NAMBLA may have been some sort of attempt to achieve that “normalization”, but society’s reaction to it should have disabused any of them of any hope that they might be acceptable.
This whole sexual offender thing is very troubling, because it pits our revulsion at this behavior against the principles of fairness under the law that we spouse as a nation. It’s going to produce increasing tension until we can reconcile the issue.
oops
“espouse”
Chadt: Why do Moonbat!s and Moonbat! orgs like the ACLU provide services to NAMBLA? If it is so abhorrent, why is on your side of the political spectrum?
Just axing!
Chadt: Why do Moonbat!s and Moonbat! orgs like the ACLU provide services to NAMBLA? If it is so abhorrent, why is on your side of the political spectrum?
This makes no sense (I know, shocking!).
The ACLU provided services to Rush Limbaugh when prosecutors tried to get his medical records. Does that mean that the ACLU is on the right?
ACLU protects people’s civil liberties, whether they’re NAMBLA or Rush Limbaugh (and it’s a toss-up which is more odious).