Well, I didn’t really expect this much reaction - or credit given - to my total speculation that Oprah had something to do with the removal of the Fernando and Nate Blog.
Just to be clear: there’s no actual proof that Oprah was at all involved; given the circumstances it just seemed likely. But it very well could have been Nate or the Bengoechea family requesting the removal, for a variety of perfectly understandable reasons, even if there wasn’t anything on it that was inappropriate (I don’t think there was, by the way).
I’m also surprised that people are upset with Oprah, thinking her primary focus is ratings or that she’s somehow taking advantage of this tragedy and Nate’s story. I don’t think so at all. Let’s be realistic here: a member of her “Harpo family” has first-hand knowledge of one of the most incredible news stories in years. Why wouldn’t she have him on? She’d try to get him on even if he weren’t already associated with Harpo. And, of course she’s going to ask for exclusivity. That’s what she almost always does, and it’s a big reason why she’s been as successful as she has.
A few people have also mentioned that it’s too soon, that it’s inappropriate or in poor taste to do a show about this now. Give me a break! The best time to do it is now, when it’s timely and still in the public’s thoughts. Yes, for ratings (and there’s nothing wrong with wanting more people to get something out of Nate’s story), but also to better encourage donations to her Angel Network tsunami relief fund. I’m just impressed - truly - that Nate had the strength and composure to tell his story so well.
Honestly, I may be a little biased here; I’ve always really liked Oprah. But I also know very well what TV is like behind-the-scenes, though admittedly not at the scale of an Oprah show. Of course her producer “screamed ‘crisis crisis crisis,’” as someone said in the comments yesterday. A member of their staff - their friend - was in danger! The producer who wrote it is “like Nate’s big sister,” Oprah said. Right after it happened, an Oprah spokeswoman said they didn’t know if they’d do a show or not; it depended on what Nate wanted. Oprah reportedly even put up the cash to pay for a group of elite former Marines to search for Fernando.
Though I know that almost everybody who’s on TV is different in their “real lives,” I really believe Oprah is genuine in her concern for people, and that her concern is the primary motivation for doing what she does. She’d be stupid to not keep the business side in mind all the time - and if nothing else, she’s a brilliant business woman - but I don’t think she lets business get in the way of doing what is right and what is best for people, especially for the people in her life, like Nate.
As for yesterday’s show, I thought it was a powerful hour of television. I got misty-eyed more than once. I also watched the After the Show, which I may have liked even more. I thought Nate was incredible in telling his story and keeping it together. I don’t think the show was manipulative or sought out pity. I think it shared a story in which we were all interested with compassion and concern.
I understand the concern voiced below about a golden calf and celebrity worship, but I don’t think Nate will fall into that trap. In fact, I don’t even think that’s an issue right now - not yet. At this point, there’s nothing wrong with some of America using Nate as their face on the tragedy. Sometimes we need something smaller to grasp onto and comprehend when the big picture is just too overwhelming to take in.
I was, however, just a little concerned that not once in the hour and a half of television did anyone say anything about Nate and Fernando’s love. While it was pretty clear that they were, indeed, in an intimate relationship, and it was obvious that they cared about each other a great deal, I was sincerely surprised that nobody ever said the word “love.” I’d guess that Nate is still in shock a little, and he’s not yet ready to articulate that level of emotion - at least not on national television. But I expected Oprah to say something comforting about how much they loved each other, or Fernando’s brother, Marcelo, to echo what he said here at Zionide a few weeks ago: that Fernando and Nate love each other very much.
Then again, I could tell all that, so maybe it was obvious without anybody having to actually say it. It was probably more compelling that way. I’m not sure why I expected the actual words though. Maybe because I wanted to see it spelled out for America: these two men were are in love, and that’s a beautiful thing.
I’d bet that too much of Oprah’s core audience has never considered man-on-man love, like any other romantic love, as amazing and wonderful, and I, in a rather ulterior motive, wanted that presented to them in a way they couldn’t deny. And I still wish it had been, because somehow, there are apparently still people out there who think Nate is this upset about his BUSINESS PARTNER being gone. Though I definitely still don’t think “friend” is a better option than “partner.”
“Lover” and “boyfriend” aren’t really good either, but if Nate were a woman whose un-married romantic “partner” was missing, they’d probably say “boyfriend.” Personally, I’d have said “fiancé” (if the relationship was at that point), since most of us committed gay folk are merely engaged to one another until we can get actually married in this country and say “husband.”
January 18, 2005 at 2:01 pm
Ummm, I guess you haven’t heard how people were told not to film Ricky Martin in Sri Lanka because Oprah owns the rights to the images. I wouldn’t put anything past Oprah. I thought her Nate show was so edited and scripted that it was sad.
January 18, 2005 at 2:16 pm
I had actually heard that, and that Martin could talk to print but not TV since Oprah only had TV rights. I haven’t seen verification of that, however, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it if it is true. If Ricky Martin wants to sell the rights to the images of his visit to Sri Lanka to someone, what’s wrong with that? He clearly doesn’t mind giving Oprah exclusivity, so why should you or I or anyone else care?
Don’t think that any other TV show or journalist wouldn’t do the exact same thing given the opportunity and funding. Exclusive rights are just the way TV is, and I would never fault Oprah for attempting to be successful - especially when she’s not causing harm in the process.
January 18, 2005 at 3:44 pm
Oprah’s brainwashed fan base is huge and worldwide! They will defend her to their death. Just watch out what you say about Oprah haha
January 18, 2005 at 3:47 pm
So if Nate or the bengoechea’s ask you to take down your site you will?
January 18, 2005 at 3:59 pm
I definitely didn’t say that, and I don’t think I implied it, either.
Regardless, keep in mind that only 8 of my 267 entries are about Nate and the tsunami, unlike the Fernando and Nate blog that was dedicated entirely to them. So I doubt anyone’s going to care about Zionide anyway.
January 18, 2005 at 6:02 pm
There were or was at least one post from someone who claimed to be in the audience for the taping. Maybe that person mentioned the blog and either Nate or Fernando’s family didn’t like it.
Anyway, Nick, I completely understand your point about not saying the “love” word. I do believe people should be able to say that about anyone they are with, regardless of their sexual orientation. That being said (and no, this isn’t an “uh oh” moment) I did completely get it that Nate and Fernando were in love. Actually, I’m envious of their relationship. I wish I could be so fortunate to say something like that one day. For Nate to say he was glad to be in a situation where he knew how Fernando died (vs. just getting a phone call) and feeling secure he didn’t suffer…to me that was very powerful. And from reading the voluminous posts on Oprah’s site, other people got it, too. My uncle was gay, and his “partner” (for lack of a better word since he died in the 1980’s and there was no term for who my uncle was in a relationship with) was just another family member to us. And I wish naturalness, honesty and acceptance to be so for all homosexual relationships going forward.
On a last note, I was very depressed today after the show yesterday. I still hold out for a “miracle.”
January 18, 2005 at 7:18 pm
The plot thickens, or coagulates, with a poster at Hunkvideo.com who claims to have an “acquaintance” who works for Oprah who claims that she (they?) had planned a full Hallmark event–details about how Nate & Fernando met, many more pictures of them together, etc., but that he allegedly didn’t want to distract from the larger disaster, though the post could also be interpreted to suggest that Nate was uncomfortable for other reasons. I can imagine either and both. I can’t imagine that he would go so far as telling them not to put one of the pictures of them together among the near dozen about this particular broadcast on O’s Web site. The poster is also, apparently, a card carrying member of the Rim Oprah club, and albeit a gay male, both ignores her willful, indefensible silence on our disenfranchisement and her contribution to our demonization [through her TWO shows leading up to the election about gay men in straight marriages] and, worse still, characterizes criticism of yesterday’s show as “personal political agenda.” We’re doomed….
January 18, 2005 at 8:01 pm
I would have liked more background info on the relationship, too, and I think we probably would have gotten more of that from a straight relationship. But I also know the limitations of a one hour TV show and understand the need to keep focus on the main topic at hand, i.e the tsunami experience, during the 48 minutes of content.
And although this is really not about Oprah’s opinion of gay people, I have to say that I hardly think she’s our enemy.
Hers was one of the first shows in the country to portray gay people as normal individuals just like anyone else, way back in the late ’80s. She was the first talk show to interview Ellen after the “Yep, I’m Gay” TIME cover - and very positively from her, even if some of her audience was not. She was also on Ellen’s coming out episode with the infamous “Good for you, you’re gay” line.
Further, I don’t expect her to give her opinion on gay rights or gay marriage any more than I expect her to talk about our government’s disenfranchisement of Native Americans on behalf of her Native American friends. Sure, I personally would love for her to talk about her gay friends and the inequalities gay people suffer in this country, but she’s under no obligation to do so just because I’d like it. No more than I’m gonna post something on Zionide just because someone out there expects me to and thinks I’m obligated to do so for whatever reason.
I saw both the supposedly “demonizing” Oprah shows and I thought they were pretty objective and balanced, with commentary from gay men who were positive representations as well as the married closet cases. I also remember Oprah making a point to differentiate the demonization of the men for cheating on their wives - regardless of the gender of the “other person” - rather than for being gay.
January 19, 2005 at 12:07 pm
I think that people need to make the distinction between Oprah the person and Oprah the media empire. Sure, she has a lot of control, but the function of one isn’t necessarily a reflection of the other. “Oprah” the business has to do what’s good for itself, though I agree that she’d never exploit Nate’s experience and loss even for a second.
I look up to her more than I do most people. But… I think back to the show where Michael Moore was on promoting Bowling for Columbine. He was talking about how the media perpetuates “fear culture” and Oprah agreed with him every step of the way. I guess she didn’t feel like her show was a part of that, but I do. If I could have lunch with her, that’s what we’d discuss.
January 19, 2005 at 12:30 pm
That disction’s a good point, Sam. And I agree about the media/fear thing. I didn’t see that show, but I’ll take your word for it. Oprah’s definitely done her fair share of “hidden danger” and “learn how to protect YOUR family from [insert harmful thing here]!”
January 20, 2005 at 1:38 pm
Ack! Too much to process! I’ll have to read your earlier posts.
August 24, 2005 at 8:25 am
Guess you can all be happy now that he let us knowwhat side of the bed he sleeps on and that the other remains crinkle free… oh to wake up to that and then read this shit.. you should be ashamed.
Lisa
New Zealand