There's an imbalance of power in the Della Bosca scandal that's been worrying me. While Della Bosca is theoretically the powerful one in the relationship between him and the woman known only as "Kate", the way in which it has been reported seems to me to unreasonably tip the balance away from Della Bosca to Kate.

Clinical psychologist Janet Hall on LiveNews put some flesh onto these concerns talking about "predator women" http://tinyurl.com/nja87o.

In the first place I'm not sure why a private matter should be reported by the press so that it remains a private matter for one of the parties, but not the other. Della Bosca is subject to scrutiny, but the woman only partially so because we know who he is and can subject what he says to some checks in terms of what we know of him.

She on the other hand can say what she likes and we have no way of gauging her honesty.

In the second place, I can't see how this matter should have the bearing on Della Bosca's career that it has, unless it compromised his ability to conduct his role as a minister of the crown. The evidence that it has is shaky, and because of the anonymity of the woman, not really subject to test.

Has the reporting of this issue over-stepped the mark? Has it been conducted ethically? Should the woman be allowed to be an anonymous source?

GY
It would appear that You and I agree. Then again I have great difficulties with the absolute concept of freedom of speech. To me this is a unnecessary and pointless titillation.
Are you aware that 'Kate' was all over ch10 last night.

I would suggest that the police minister's statement that he is the best strategic political mind in the country is somewhat threadbare give he tends to be accident prone.

The sad reality is that the mass love a good sex scandal and the media is more than willing to foster this lesser side of society for their own selfish needs. My concern isn't the incident it's trivial but as part of the desensitizing of people.

Valid questions, Graham.

>>Has the reporting of this issue over-stepped the mark? Has it been conducted ethically?<<

The two angles on the story are news-as-information, (a government minister has resigned) and news-as-entertainment, (they had sex on a couch.)

Given that it is the NSW government that is involved, the ministerial aspect of it is already pretty close to irrelevant.

Given also that the Minister concerned has been in the public eye, and had his private life scrutinised quite recently in "Piranhagate", there is very little serious news that can be presented to the public.

So we should simply accept that the entire sad episode will be handled as sleazy tabloid material, complete with faux-psychological analyses of behavioral patterns.

His, along the lines of "this is what power does to you, it overrides your ethical control mechanisms and unzips your trousers." Hers, along the lines of "scheming woman, out for everything she can get".

Ethical treatment has never been a characteristic of tabloid journalism, while overstepping the mark is practically a requirement.

But in a way, it is also cathartic. By getting all this sex 'n' treachery out in the open and working the material to death in a short space of time, it will be very quickly forgotten.

Unless of course Belinda Neal provides further gripping material, Lorena Bobbett-style, down the track.

Who leaked the story? Was it Kate? This hasn't been reported as far as I recall.

And what was the motive? Is it a square-up for things Della Bosca has done in the past or just an accidental slip of the tongue that the media got hold of and beat up?

These are questions that need answering to ascertain whether Della is getting his just desserts or not.

I tend to agree too, Graham - although it's a moot point now that Kate Neil has been outed [ http://tiny.cc/HE4S3 ]. Since the story broke, I've been thinking that there must be something else going on that we're not hearing about.

While Della Bosca's reported actions might be morally reprehensible, I wouldn't have thought that an extramarital affair would in itself be a hanging offence for a government minister. Indeed, given who he's married to, I imagine many people would understand why he might stray from the matrimonial boudoir.

I do not see any imbalance here.

A woman has disclosed that she had an affair with a married man. the man has admitted to this, so there is no reason for the woman not to retain her privacy.

If the man had disputed the matter it would be a different kettle of fish.

The man concerned is a public firure who holds high office and must resign, or be removed, because he has shown himself to be dishonest. A married person cannot be involved in an affair without being a liar and a cheat. Therefore not being worthy to hold office.

If his wife had said that she had no objection to him having sex outside their marriage, again it would be different. But that has not happened.

Other Parliamentairians have lost their positions because they cheated on their travel or car allowances, etc. This is no different.

He has admitted to being a cheat and we cannot accept that in public figures.

We let politicians get away with far too much as it is.