Reading the comments here about Eliot Spitzer as Attorney General and finding myself wondering if posters genuinely believe that as AG of New York, Spitzer should have cut some slack to all parties involved in the payola and plugola scandal a few years ago.
There appears to be a body of thought that Entercom, Citadel, CBS, Clear Channel and other local individuals and companies should have been given a pass for breaking the law, or at least that such transgressions should not have been arduously pursued. I don't understand, nor do I agree.
Does not the proper functioning of a civilized society depend on individuals and businesses complying with the laws that govern their businesses and lives? Regardless of who's responsible for enforcing those laws and prosecuting the parties who have been charged with breaking the law, the law must be upheld.
As it relates to the payola and plugola cases of a few years ago, the actions that transpired between the record companies, promoters and radio stations, as well as some individuals at those stations, were against the law. It was the Attorney General's responsibility to charge and prosecute those parties who violated the law.
Was Spitzer and his department heavy-handed? Arguably so. But no more heavy-handed than the counsel who represented the individuals and companies involved.
It's difficult to have much sympathy for those companies that broke the law in the payola-plugola scandals; equally difficult to have sympathy for the man who prosecuted those parties, yet broke other laws (perhaps for many years) and recently fell from grace. But Spitzer's actions don't make those charged, and in some cases, those who pleaded no contest or guilty, with payola-plugola any less culpable. Bankers, Wall Street wolves, radio CEO's and record companies may have had a hearty laugh at Spitzer's demise, but Spitzer's failings don't exonerate the broadcasters, record companies and individuals for their transgressions of the law.
Spitzer's sexual misconduct violated the law, but the greater failings may be the hubris, extremism and callousness that he displayed bringing to justice those he prosecuted over the years as attorney general. Perhaps this entire ordeal can serve as lessons in pride, humility and common sense. To say nothing of repentence and forgiveness, all in due time.
