Missing Richard Simmons

Hi All -

I'm sure many of you are familiar with the "Missing Richard Simmons" Podcast that has topped the iTunes podcast charts the last several weeks. I finished the last episode on my commute to work this morning and thought the controversy surrounding this piece of media would be great to talk about in class.

I waited until I was finished with the Podcast to read this article (spoiler alert!) in the NY Times to better understand how the Podcast is being covered. Dan Taberski, the Podcast's creator, walks a fine line between excellent journalism and an invasion of privacy. In order to justify his invasion of privacy he refers to himself a concerned friend of Simmons who created the Podcast from "a place of love and real concern" but the Times goes on to dismantle this defense. They highlight a key aspect journalists must keep in might: "The relationship between journalists and subjects shouldn’t be confused with friendship. Journalists have power over their subjects and a responsibility to try to minimize harm. But Mr. Taberski leverages his claim to friendship to reverse the equation, arguing instead that it’s Mr. Simmons who has the responsibility to speak to him, and to explain himself to his former acquaintances and fans." 

I would like to open this up for debate and ask the class whether or not they agree with the Times' definition of a how a journalist should behave. Is Mr. Taberski is in the wrong by pushing for the private details of Simmons' life and publicizing the process in a gripping and mysterious type Podcast? 

-Hugh