A journalist rents a house next door to Sarah Palin with the sole intent to write a book about her, Sarah Palin writes some fairly tongue-in-cheek things in response to this development, and it the latter who is “despicable?”
Gee, I wonder why the Washington Post has roughly zero credibility at this point.
Ed Morrissey has more.
Perhaps the “stalking” accusation reflects the fact that McGinniss once bid over $50,000 to have dinner with Palin (he was eventually outbid) and his own son’s assessment (possibly meant as sarcasm, although Politico’s Ben Smith reports it at face value) that McGinniss is indulging a romantic interest in Palin. If McGinniss wanted to write an unauthorized biography, he could certainly do that without moving in next door to the Palins. In fact, it’s hard to figure what McGinniss would learn from that kind of physical proximity that has anything to do with politics or activism that couldn’t be learned through regular research and footwork.
As asinine and incredible as Kitty Kelly’s biographies get, she didn’t need to live next door to her celebrity targets to write them. If it’s not stalking, it’s a very lazy journalism at best. It also seems needlessly provocative, which will undermine the credibility of anything McGinniss has to say later.
None of this is meant as an argument that McGinniss doesn’t have the right to rent a property in which he desires to live, of course. No one is arguing that the police should evict him if he and the landlord have concluded a mutually satisfactory business relationship for the lease. That doesn’t mean that people can’t criticize McGinniss, his motives, his ethics and purpose as a journalist, and what looks like an odd obsession with the Palins. It also doesn’t mean that the Palins will not have to protect themselves from the potential for conflicts and invasion of privacy.