Until recently, a TV station could hype an erroneous news story
about a raunchy controversy, grab a few viewers at 11:00 p.m., and
titillate them with scandal—without any re-percussions from
anybody. But lately, thanks to the internet, the mainstream media is
finding it harder to get away with hack reporting.
Case in point: On November 17, KOMO 4 News ran a “Problem Solvers”
segment about the Center for Sex Positive Culture, a private sex club
with 2,500 active members and a sister organization that teaches
classes on having better sex. News anchor Dan Lewis announced that
Allena Gabosch, the organization’s executive director, “is seeking
state and federal money to finance part of her sex organization.”
Cut to KOMO’s Marlee Ginter—the aforementioned “problem
solver”—taking a tour of a windowless sex room. “I went to the
club on one of its busiest nights. I saw people naked, fondling,
flogging,” says Ginter. Then, lilting her voice: “And even having
sex.”
But the problem for this “problem solver” was supposedly with the
center’s funding. The organization’s club is a 501(c)(7) nonprofit. Its
tax exemption, Ginter argued, is the equivalent of a government
giveaway.
“She obviously found a way around the system,” says a random woman
in Ginter’s report—included, presumably, to demonstrate public
outrage about the center’s finances.
However, Gabosch tells The Stranger, “We do not get money
from the government or from tax dollars” to fund the club or the
organization’s sex-education wing. Indeed, IRS rules for (c)(7)s state
that “a club should be supported solely by membership fees, dues, and
assessments,” which are not tax deductible. And the sex-education wing
of the organization is a separately funded 501(c)(3), which also
receives no government funding.
In her report, unsurprisingly, Ginter never cites IRS rules.
Instead, she focuses on sexual taboos like bondage beds. In an apparent
effort to prove the state is failing to regulate the club, she
interviews Tabitha Blacksmith, a spokeswoman for the Charities Program
of the Washington Secretary of State, which only tracks nonprofits’
contributions. Ginter asks, “So you guys won’t even determine… you’re
not a charity, you’re a sex club.” Blacksmith explained to Ginter that
was outside the state’s purview.
“We don’t have anything to do with [verifying] the (c)(3) or
(c)(7),” Blacksmith told The Stranger a week after the
interview. “That’s the IRS.”
According to IRS rules, in order to qualify as a 501(c)(7),
organizations must maintain “personal contact, commingling, and
face-to-face fellowship. Members must share interests and have a common
goal directed toward pleasure, recreation, and other nonprofitable
purposes.”
By the IRS’s standards, in other words, it practically has to
be a sex club.
But Ginter never brings up the tax rules governing groups like the
center—probably because citing what those rules actually say
would undermine the premise that there is a “problem.”
The morning after KOMO’s sexposé aired, Stranger editorial director Dan Savage launched an online assault on KOMO for
its “sex-negative posturing” and called on readers of Slog, The
Stranger‘s blog, to e-mail complaints to Ginter. The post was
linked on numerous websites. Meanwhile, the video of the segment went
up on YouTube.
KOMO pulled the piece from its website the next day. But the
controversy was a dozen blog posts and thousands of YouTube views from
being over. “KOMO’s Marlee Ginter Might Be Sucking Off Goats,” two
headlines read—a reference to Ginter’s insinuation that the
center “might be” getting money from the government. After all, it was
just as true that Ginter “might be” blowing goats as it was that the
Center “might be” getting government funding.
Within a day, that headline became the second Google result for
Ginter’s name.
Is dragging an individual reporter’s name through the manure too
harsh, considering Ginter was simply using sensationalism to boost
ratings—the same as any other TV news organization? Tom Huang, an
ethics and diversity fellow at the Poynter Institute, a journalism
school and think tank, thinks it might be justified.
“Sometimes [targeting an individual reporter] is unfair in certain
stories, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t happen,” Huang says. “The
alternative media can push the traditional media to do a better job….
Potentially, it might make editors and reporters more cautious about
how they report stories.”
At the Center for Sex Positive Culture, the hubbub over the smear
piece has been a boon. Radio coverage has featured Gabosch, and members
have been “donating to [the center] all week” through KOMO’s Problem
Solvers webpage. Members “have been very supportive and reenergized
about the center,” says Gabosch. “This whole thing has turned out to be
great for us in the long run.” 
The donations through the Problem Solver’s web page have been refused and refunded.
KOMO has recently returned all the donations it received that were marked for the Center for Sex Positive Culture.
But this is a great story. Thank you, Dominic and Dan!
Never pick on an organization that has over 11000 members. BTW..it’s not a sex club…it’s a community center…founded by those in the community that wanted a space where judgements such as the one KOMO tried to hand down..don’t happen..other then that awesome coverage..Dan Savage Rocks…
HOW MUCH LONGER ARE YOU GOING TO DRAG THIS STORY THROUGH THE CRAPPER! You guys are more fixated with this story then anyone else. Its like you’re a baby who got a shot and keeps crying over nothing. Get over it. My god! Lets see, today is the 27th. 10 days of DRAMA that Dan and the lamest advertisement filled newspa…wait…crappaper keeps writing about! You’re not news. I bet when 9/11 happened you guys were done talking about that the next day and onto anal beads and the new KY goop. You know why you are defending this story such much “Stranger”? Because the “sex” that you all are crying about komo doing a story on, is the same “sex” that pays you to put into your worthless crappaper by way of adds. So…you are just feeding off this as well and know that they will spend more money for add space because you just keep going at it like it’s the fucking end of the world! Its like you scratch our back I will scratch yours. We can all see through your smoke screen “Stranger”. We all know how bad the news is going down the drain, but I guess you’re to slow to catch up to R.E.A.L.I.T.Y.
You guys are like flys on tarpaper. Get over it….let this die!
It’s a sex club…glorified bath house. Calling it a “center” doesn’t change that. Yes KOMO made a mistake…but don’t try to paint the club as some cornerstone of the community. It doesn’t serve any more of a purpose than any of the bath houses on Capitol Hill.
“…like flies on tarpaper.” Yeah, that makes about as much sense as the rest of what you said. If you’re tired of it, stop reading about it.
@My opinion: CSPC is a LOT of things, including a sex club, yes. A bath house, no. Have you ever even been there? Besides, what the hell is wrong with a sex club? Or a bath house? Or with glorifying either?
It’s called a “center” because it is a non-profit organization that is run mostly by volunteers.
@LongTimeReader – I am not sure you’re getting the point of this article. This is not about the ‘sex club’. It is about how agencies, like KOMO, have previously been able to create news and problems in the past unabated and without any real chance for retribution. In this case however, the attack was not unmet due to the use of what had previously been unavailable to those assaulted, an equal playing field.
KOMO clearly manufactured a story where one didn’t exist, with the sole purpose of pushing their opinion on matters to the public. The story was one-sided (aka prejudiced), unfactual, and uncalled for. The reported and editor were both at fault for making the news. The editing of this story so distorted what was discussed that it casts a shadow of doubt onto all people that work in the field.
In other words, other professional reporters will be cast into the same light as this one. I am sure that other, professional reporters do not want to be classified the same way as this one. There is a code of ethics that professional reports should follow: (search google for society of professional journalists for the basic ethics).
She did not come close to following these rules.
Here are a few ethics that Marlee Ginter, her editor(s), and KOMO completely disregarded, and I would argue, on purpose:
– Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.
— Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
— Never distort the content of news photos or video. Image enhancement for technical clarity is always permissible. Label montages and photo illustrations.
— Avoid misleading re-enactments or staged news events. If re-enactment is necessary to tell a story, label it.
— Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.
— Avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status.
— Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting.
— Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
— Expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media.
— Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.
KOMO, their editors, and their reports should not expect anything in the way of professional coverage or respect when they manufacture news, use their personal bias as part of the news fail to admit when they have made a mistake.
So is Dan right in calling them to the carpets. In a word yes. You may not agree with his methods, but his actions are in line with what other journalists should be saying or doing.
What would you expect if KOMO Problem Solvers decided to pay you a visit, manufacture a story, and air it on the news? How are others supposed to be able to tell what is the truth from what is someone’s crusade to stamp out things they don’t agree with or like.
What I am truly surprised by is that only a few professionals took action when they saw this. It would seem to me that the real story here is how KOMO’s Problem Solvers are really Problem Makers.
I believe this requires you all to google the term “Skull fuck a kitten”.
there may not be anything wrong about the idea of a “sex club” but unfortunately, in practice, lots of things are wrong about sex and fetish clubs – this one in particular.
Of the six members I formed contacts with, one turned out to be a child rapist. Not suspected – a confirmed child rapist, and he goes there to act out fantasies just like his crime.
So anyone playing there, know that sadist that you are submitting to may be fantasizing that you are the little girl that he got away with sadistically raping.
Ewww, that’s really creepy.
If that’s true, I think you need to make sure everyone knows who this guy is. Knowledge implies responsibility. If you’ve got proof, please take it to the leaders of this center. I’m sure they would not want him there to victimize again!
A year ago, I had a conversation with my 80 year old grandmother and we happened upon the subject of Dungeons and Dragons. I played it in my teens, back in the 80’s, like a lot of other dorks my age. She mentioned how scared she was back then when she heard I had been playing it. 60 minutes, a nationally watched tv news show, did a similarly bullshit smear job on the game and those of us who played it for the sole purpose of scaring parents and grandparents. I’m not all that interested in the center for sex positive culture, but this story is hugely important to me.
Here’s a quote from Gary Gygax on that: “In many ways I still resent the wretched yellow journalism that was clearly evident in (the media’s) treatment of the game — 60 Minutes in particular. I’ve never watched that show after Ed Bradley’s interview with me because they rearranged my answers. When I sent some copies of letters from mothers of those two children who had committed suicide who said the game had nothing to do with it, they refused to do a retraction or even mention it on air. What bothered me is that I was getting death threats, telephone calls, and letters. I was a little nervous. I had a bodyguard for a while. ” That’s from http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Gary_Gygax
I hope the Stranger never drops this.
If Former Member is telling the truth it should be reported to the appropriate people at the club.
NOT put up here, anonymous and unverifiable, another piece of rumour to smear the club.
So speak out. What is this person’s name? Or are you afraid of a libel suit because you are lying?
@MyOpinion
That’s really not true. There is a lot of focus on workshops/education. How many bathhouses have libraries?
Just remember that at your local bar, and in fact, even in church, there will also be child rapists. One out of six? Sounds about right for the US population, since 1/3 of women are molested, and many molesters abuse more than one child. There are a lot of these guys who are either flying under the radar or never charged. I’m sure the CSPC management would like to know who the guy is so as to remove him, but my point is, don’t assume you are safer in the general population. In the last couple of years, it seems to be ministers and teachers who are charged quite often.
Anonymous accusations are the same as “yellow” journalism — intended to incite without factual backup.
CSPC is an organization that supports and encourages the consentual responsible free expression of any adult person’s sexual choices. They support the building of community — and the people within that community support others — therefore there are discussion groups, social evenings, and educational seminars. The Center is supported entirely by volunteers who work their butts off to provide those events, including setting up the space, monitoring for safety, and cleaning the premises when everyone has gone home. People volunteer their skills at carpentry, plumbing, electrical, bookkeeping, computers and lots more just to have a place to be themselves among those who accept them as they are. Dangerous place, huh? *sigh*
@former member – Firstly, it’s better by far to act out rape fantasies with a consensual, age-appropriate partner than it is to do it for real. Some people are naturally sexually attracted to children or young teens. They can’t help it.
Secondly, the VAST majority of the people I have known there (I am a member and former volunteer – 6 months on laundry crew) are wonderful people. Really incredible human beings who are a joy to spend time with. No euphemism there; I’m not referring to sex (though there’s nothing at all wrong with that); I’m referring to social interaction.
You only formed contacts with six members? That’s sad.
Finally, while the CSPC is a sex club, that’s not all that it is, and so referring to it as such is highly misleading. The CSPC is a community center which also happens to host sex parties. Big difference.
MG – I’m not afraid of libel, I’m afraid of him, which is why I’m not naming him here. He is a violent person and has threatened me before.
Knowledge does imply responsibility – so when I have the proof in hand, and have moved residences, I will forward it to Allena.
I met more than six but after the sixth actual relationship, where my play partner turned out to be the violent pedophile rapist, I stopped going to the club or keeping contact with any members.
I went there for “sex positive” but it didn’t turn out so positive. I’m not saying CSPC shouldn’t exist – I’m saying be wary of fetishists whose lives revolve around the club. He only told me after we became “emotionally” involved, so all the casual play partners he has there haven’t a clue.
Although there are many good Journalists, it’s really amazing how many are not. We live in a society where sensationalism is common in the news, no matter what type of media. After 9/11, news about the event was quickly suppressed, even in the public telecast area because of the “detrimental effects of such violence on our children”. Yet, you see this kind of reporting all the time. A friend of mine was victimized by this kind of reporting because he managed a Plasma Center and the reporter who wrote the article about the center was extremely biased towards these Centers because “of the negative impact on the community”. It didn’t matter to the reporter that the center itself (as are all plasma centers) are very strictly monitored by OSHA, even more so than a blood bank.
Both articles were negative journalism aimed at creating outrage. Nothing more.