The new issue of Frank Magazine is out, and my friend Floyd is on the cover. Of course, she is the morning co-host at my beloved Live 105. I interviewed her a couple of years ago, and she was a great delight to meet. She called me "Buddy" last year when I saw her at the station, and it made me smile. Maybe she thought I had gas. I assure you, and her, that it was a smile.
Frank spends a couple of pages discussing her private life. This morning, on the air, Floyd addressed the story for what she says will be the only time. She allowed that some of what Frank reported is correct, but quite a bit was wrong. I have no way of knowing which is which, and it's none of my damned business anyway, so it's not like I will try to find out on my own.
Floyd has admitted to making some mistakes. She is human, as we all are. We all succumb to the faults and foibles and weaknesses that befall mere humans. That she has admitted to these errors, and is seeking help for them, says a lot to me about her character, and I respect her all the more for it. I don't judge. First stone, and all that.
Frank Magazine has a place. It reports things that need to be reported and states things that need to be stated. But they do dig into people's private lives when nothing positive can be gained by doing so. An example would be what they say about Floyd in the current issue. There are an awful lot of other examples.
Do you remember Roger Ebert, the recently-deceased film critic? Of course you do. He was an inveterate writer after he lost his ability to speak, writing about everything and nothing, producing a prodigious amount of output of such scope, breadth and quality that nobody could ever hope to wade through it all. One day he wrote about how lucky he had been in his being able to interview so many movie stars during his long career. He noted that they were comfortable with him because he only wanted to discuss the work. As Ebert put it, he had no interest in talking about where people "stored their genitals at night". It's hard to get that phrase out of my head. I hope it's hard to get out of yours, going forward. You're welcome.
If I have had any success with the radio interviews I have done, it is largely because I do not want to talk about the salacious aspects of the radio business. I have worked in office environments in which a man left his wife for another man, where an employee stole computer equipment and sold it, where an employee discovered a flaw in a process that resulted in her having funds deposited directly into her bank account rather than where they were supposed to go. I have seen and heard enough of that stuff that I don't need to hear any more of it from my radio friends. They seem to respect that, and trust me as a result. At least, I hope they do.
I'm not sure where I'm going with this. I suppose it is just that there are things that people do not need to know. They may want to know, but they don't need to know. That a friend of mine was embarrassed and had her privacy violated is disappointing to me. It weakens us when we give into common gossip and innuendo, when we think we know everything about a subject based upon a 3 minute television report, or read a one-sided report citing unnamed sources, people who don't have the stones to step forward and reveal their identity to the world. I think we can all be better than that. I hope you agree.
Floyd, as always, my very best to you. Let's do lunch soon. K?
See you guys tomorrow, from the cottage!