Just Because They Can?

Is that why the blog "Passionate America" plastered the name, IM address, MySpace profile and multiple photos of someone they claim is a page who took part in IM conversations with Mark Foley?

I read the post, and there's plenty of information about how they discovered this person's identity, but no explanation as to why they exposed him - in the second sentence of the post, the author says "I will explain to you why I believe it necessary to reveal Jordan Edmund's identity," but never does.

I'm with Greg at Political Pit Bull:

This was beyond irresponsible. As bloggers, we are beholden only to ourselves and our judgment. For most blogs, it's up one person, and one person alone, to use his or her common sense to deem what is and what is not appropriate to share with the world. This exposure of a victim's identity obviously falls into the latter category.

I agree. And while I don't generally consider Raw Story to be a reliable source, they claim the wrong person was outed.

UPDATE: Michelle nails it:

For the past two days, a conservative blogger has ginned up publicity for his work outing a 21-year-old young man--a former congressional page and current deputy campaign manager for a heartland Republican congressman--who received sexually explicit instant messages from disgraced Florida GOP Rep. Mark Foley when he was 17 and 18 years old. I have received several e-mails from the blogger and readers flogging the post.

I refused to link to the blogger then and even though the Drudge Report has plastered screaming headlines about the blogger's scoop, I refuse to link to it now. There was absolutely no good reason to expose the former congressional page's name and identity. Seizing on ABC News' redaction failure and reporting errors (more on that in a moment) to play gotcha in a feeble attempt to avenge Foley is not a sufficient reason to obliterate the young man's privacy. The young man was the prey, not the predator.

UPDATE II: The Hill reports:

The source who in July gave news media Rep. Mark Foley’s (R-Fla.) suspect e-mails to a former House page says the documents came to him from a House GOP aide. ... The source bolstered the claim by sharing un-redacted e-mails in which the former page first alerted his congressional sponsor’s office of Foley’s attentions. The copies of these e-mails, now available to the public, have the names of senders and recipients blotted out.

So much for the VLWC.

UPDATE III: What were these guys thinking? (via La Shawn Barber)

 

Comments

[hunter]

So the fact that Foley was not having IM sex with a minor is not important?
The fact that the dhimmicrats were accusing Foley of seeking sex with minors, along with the MSM in this and were deliberatley lying is not important?
With all respect, you are being played.
And how many times does the difference between e-mails and IMs have to be made before the timeline of what happened is clearly not as the MSM/DNC wants you to think it happened?

[seawitch]

I am dismayed that the poor kid now has his name plastered all over the internet. His identity should not have been revealed. There is no excuse for it. Attack Foley as he deserves. Foley was in a position of trust and violated it by those messages to the teen. Exposing the teen's name only further harms the kid.

[Marina making pictures]

What a shame for ABC.
I hope the victim is going to sue them for publishing his name. What a shame for ABC.

Thank you for sharing this story with me !

the author says "I will explain to you why I believe it necessary to reveal Jordan Edmund's identity," but never does.

I think he made the reason quite clear near the end of his post:

I have more to say about this, but I am posting this now because it is already out. I have been contacted by the media and I might be on TV soon.

[hunter]

Mrs. R,
I stand by my position: the dems have been playing uson this. I decline to be played by them. See my link in answer to your call for Hastert's resignation.
This has been Rathergate X 10.
We should focus our fury and our outrage and disgust where it belongs: the enemy.