A vacation in name only

Since we're in a bit of a lull in the primary season right now, it seems as good a time as any for the embattled candidates to take a little R&R. So Barack Obama has taken his family on a brief Easter holiday to an unspecified location. But the media quickly discovered that he was on St. Thomas (part of the US Virgin Islands), which created a bit of and ethical dilemma: is it right to follow a candidate on vacation? On the one hand, he IS a public figure, and just the fact that he's on vacation is national news. On the other hand, Obama clearly wanted some privacy, and how much actual news is likely to come up while he's lounging on the beach, anyway? To say nothing of the privacy of his two daughters, who are certainly not public figures. Where does one draw the line?

In the end, CNN was the only outfit that sent anyone out cover the Obama vacation. They even managed to get some video of the candidate at rest. The footage is more than a bit sketchy; it seems that Obama doesn't even realize that he's being videotaped. When does reporting cross the line into stalking? Does being a presidential candidate mean you give up any chance of refuge from the press?

As mentioned earlier, only one media outlet sent anyone to cover the vacation. But the others were more than happpy to report what CNN found, of course. Did CNN commit an ethical gaffe? Perhaps. But it could be that ethics weren't the motivation for the other organizations leaving Obama alone. Regularly covering a candidate can be almost as tiring as being a candidate. Jeff Zeleny, who works the New York Times' Obama beat and has been covering the candidate since the race began, said the vacation "kind of felt like the beginning of spring break.”

Hope they both get some shut-eye, because Obama goes back to the campaign trail on Wednesday.

IN OTHER NEWS....this: