The (sorta) nude BART flak pictures


At first, I wasn't going to say anything about the kinda, sorta naked pictures of BART spokesman Linton Johnson that the Anonymous folks found somewhere (perhaps on his email) and posted for all to see. I didn't want to give this any more attention than it already had.

But it's been bothering me, so I decided to weigh in, to wit:

This is none of anyone's damn business.

I've had a lot of problems with Johnson in the past, and I think his move to shut down cell phone service was stupid and a violation of the First Amendment. But that's professional -- I'm a reporter, and he's a flak, and he represents a very fucked up agency, and we're going to fight. The pictures are his personal life, and I don't care what he does when he's not working for BART.

Half (or more) of the hipsters in San Francisco, some of whom hold prominent positions in city politics, media and business, tend to get way more naked than Linton Johnson at Burning Man -- and I don't care about that, either, and neither should anyone else. I don't suppose Jane Kim and David Chiu will join the nekkid brigade and get their naughty parts all dusty on the Playa, but if they do, it won't change my opinion about the Twitter tax break or the selection of Ed Lee as mayor.

Sure: People who work as P.R. agents for public agencies should be careful about what they do with these kinds of photos. Or that's the conventional wisdom. But this is San Francisco; what possible difference does it make if a person who's in the public eye likes to party with the boys?

We all talk a lot about web privacy, but when shit like this happens, we just stop and giggle. But we shouldn't, because when you start playing Gotcha' politics with people's personal lives  you head down a very ugly road.




Linton does his job well. I could not do his job and sleep well at night knowing I bent the truth or told a half lie. But come to think of it...why would BART need such a spokesperson? - if they were on the up and up about situations. BART has to be very careful in all its dealings because there are lawyers that use BART as their meal ticket. To Linton johnson, I kept them at bey!

Posted by bubu on Sep. 01, 2011 @ 6:49 pm

Explain exactly how shutting down their wifi system ultimately disabling cell service has anything to do with the 1st amendment. It does not in any way shape or form infringe on anyone's rights. Inciting a riot on the other hand is against the law. BART also has a responsibility to their patrons and protecting them is exactly what they did.

I also find it quite hypocritical of you liberals to call out someone like this for non work related activities when Clinton was on duty in the oval office having sexual relations with a subordinate and you all said it was his own business.

Liberals are always looking for a fight and to push their issues on the rest of society. Yet liberals are always the group shouting for people to accept the issues they agree with but they (liberals) don'tr accept the beliefs or out look of others. Lots of Hippocratic rants here.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 02, 2011 @ 1:55 pm

I don't care about the pictures. I have zero respect for Linton Johnson. Nada. I felt that way about him before I read this on another site:

"Bay Area Rapid Transit spokesman Linton Johnson said Tuesday that he was lying awake early Thursday when he was struck by the thought of shutting off power to the agency's wireless networks. He sent an e-mail to BART police, who had asked employees for all ideas - "good or bad, constitutional or unconstitutional," Johnson said."

Unconstitutional? Why would he ask employees for ideas including unconstitutional? That tells me all I need to know about him. I would have hoped that someone in his position would have instead asked for all ideas WITHIN the law and WITHIN the U.S. Constitution (including the amendments). It speaks very, very poorly of him to have said what he said. He should resign, someone of that mind. Although I know he's not likely to. "We" have too many people just like him in positions of power. Ugh.

Posted by QUEER Jorge Orwell 1984 on Sep. 02, 2011 @ 3:28 pm

Correction: I re-read that quoted part. If I am reading that quoted paragraph correctly (it was a bit confusing to me), it was the BART police who asked all employees for all ideas including unconstitutional, which should surprise no one considering their behavior. It's still bad. But it's the BART cops who asked for ideas unconstitutional, not Johnson, if I'm reading that correctly.

Posted by QUEER Jorge Orwell 1984 on Sep. 02, 2011 @ 3:40 pm