Chris Gelken has nearly 20 years experience as a photographer, writer, news editor and broadcaster.

For the past 11 years Chris has been based in Asia where he now works for Hong Kong's leading AM radio news station, Metro Plus.

Chris also contributes freelance material on a wide variety of topics to newspapers, magazines and radio networks internationally.

Click here to link to Chris Gelken's previous columns.

You can e-mail Chris Gelken directly by clicking here.

October 6, 1998 -- Hong Kong -- If one was ever in any doubt about how media driven the Clinton/Lewinsky investigation and impeachment process has been, five minutes worth of Larry King Live the other night would have blown away any lingering suspicions. Hosted by CNN White House correspondent, Wolf Blitzer, the show was full of leading and loaded questions. I almost gagged. I know a chat show isn't supposed to be the cutting edge of investigative journalism, but the host should offer equal time to his guests to get their point across - and protection against personal attacks.

Blitzer wasn't impartial and made no attempt to hide his bias, encouraging the 'Get Clinton' guests to vent their spleens and attack the more level headed members of the panel. I switched off when a right-winger began slinging the accusation against noted lawyer Alan Dershowitz: "Why should anyone listen to your opinion, you defended a killer and got him off!" In the interests of fairness Blitzer should have stepped in, he didn't.

I don't think Blitzer did himself any favours. A chat show host is a chat show host and a correspondent is a correspondent. Different animals but with a few interchangeable skills. By trying to be both and allowing his bias to show, Blitzer wasn't terribly good at the former, and he has diminished his credibility as the latter. Next time I see him reporting from the White House lawn I will be wondering how much of his report is 'Blitzer's view' and how much is impartially presented news.

I suppose it makes for good television, heated debate beamed right into our living rooms. But when I think about all the time and expense that has gone into investigating, debating, disecting and delivering the wet and sticky details of a Presidential blow-job on prime time television, all I can do is throw my hands up and scream; "What a crock of shinola! Get over it."

This media obsession is as much out of step with overall public demand as the GOP is with its impeachment process. But, compare the more than 60 percent who don't want impeachment and want the affair to go away with the almost 40 percent who do and watch these shows screaming for more sexual details - well that 40 percent makes for pretty good television ratings. Good ratings bring in the advertisers and that means even bigger bucks for the Blitzers of this business.

The focus on lurid sexual detail is what helps keep the ratings high - but is that what the news media is for? If the Clinton/Lewinsky affair had been handled in the same way that most broadcasters present their business and stock market news, the public would have switched off a long time ago. We might also have learned if the particular tobacco product in question was a Cuban cigar - now that would have been an impeachable offense. Where it was eventually inserted would have carried far less import than on the national origin of the thighs it was originally rolled.

Now that the Judiciary Committee has voted to move ahead with an open-ended process of possible impeachment I guess we will all have to suffer months of similar shows going over the same ground, again, and again, and again, and again. Thank goodness my cable supplier carries HBO and the Discovery Channel. I plan to do what a whole lot of Americans and people overseas are already doing. Folks, I am tuning out on Clinton/Lewinsky - except where I have to deal with it in my 'day job' at the radio station. From time to time I may feel impelled to vent my frustration through this column, but I am convinced there are things bigger than Billy's Willy and Monica's Mouth that we should be discussing over coffee and donuts. Or an after dinner cigar. Whatever.

I might be wrong, but this is an opinion piece and that's my opinion.

-- Chris Gelken