Did The Post’s Accent section go too far with its “Naked Ambition” feature? Sheri Bautz, an associate pastor at the First Free Methodist Church in West Palm Beach, is certain of it. So is Ann Kucik, who said she was calling on behalf of many other women.
They called to complain about the Sept. 28 article that pulled the covers off the mind-set of some local strip-club dancers. We generally disagreed. But the Listening Post is a forum for readers’ complaints. Summarizing theirs:
“Glamorized this profession”….”As working women and mothers, we have been put down”….”So one-sided. Was very biased and planted a lot of seeds in a lot of children’s heads. A lot of young girls reading this will think they can make $2,000 a week taking off their clothes”….”So many things were not written about the downside of it — the drugs, the prostitution, the ugliness of it”….”The language was like something out of a pornographic magazine”….”Gave a description of what occurs (in the clubs) without a condemnation of how the county feels about it.”
I asked The Post’s assistant managing editor for features, Melissa Segrest, to comment.
“For some reason, in recent months, strip clubs are the subject of two Hollywood movies and a best-selling book,” Ms. Segrest said. “The subject has crossed into mainstream popular culture, and we wanted to see whether the real clubs — particularly the bigger ones that bill themselves as `gentlemen’s clubs’ — match up to the celluloid fantasy.
“I suppose it’s a backhanded compliment to staff writer Mary Jane Fine’s writing that her descriptions were assailed for their detail. Just because we write about — and describe (carefully) — a subject doesn’t mean we’re endorsing it.
“Yes, these women do make a lot of money. Is that a good thing? I suppose you could read it that way. Or you could read it and decide that these women are unskilled and grasping, more to be pitied than admired for throwing away their dignity and self-esteem by dancing naked in front of men.
“We talked to law enforcement officials, and they essentially said they don’t pay much attention to these clubs because the courts have ruled them acceptable. Perhaps that is troubling, too.
“Not every story in the newspaper every day is ideal reading for children. There are frequently stories that need to be explained to kids and young teens. Murder. War. Domestic abuse. O.J.
“I think this was one of those.”
My thoughts? As I told the callers, I didn’t read the article as an endorsement, nor was it necessary that it be written in disparaging tones. I also didn’t read this as the definitive nudie-club article. Yes, there are many other sides to this story; the paper should write those, too. Ms. Fine scored, meanwhile, with such lines as:
“Only in America, it would seem, can a culture embrace such fare while simultaneously touting a return to `family values.’ ”
* * *
“Ozone hole enlarging,” an article that ran on Page 5A on Sept. 13, had Margaret Jerico of West Palm Beach wanting to know how Post editors “rate the priority and importance of articles and their placement.” To her, the news was “of importance to every Palm Beach County resident” and “citizen of the world.” And it is “the media’s responsibility,” she said, “to bring it to the public’s attention.”
But the problem with the ozone hole, said Managing Editor Tom O’Hara, “is that every time it gets larger, it eventually shrinks again. It’s possible that this time the hole is going to keep getting bigger and bigger, and we’ll all soon die. But the story didn’t say that. People accuse newspapers of being run by tree-hugging environmental nuts. In fact, we try to be cautious with stories that only speculate that the sky is falling.”
