Miami’s most famous former Catholic priest, Fr. Alberto Cutié, is blasting the Church, saying there are gay priests at “all levels” and that the Church would never be able to function without them.

Cutié, who was forced out of the Diocese of Miami after photos surfaced showing the priest kissing his then girlfriend (they’re now married with a baby daughter), has now written a book, Dilemma: A Priest’s Struggle with Faith and Love, which was released today.

According to the Miami Herald, Cutié writes that the Church’s insistence on celibacy has led directly to the sex-abuse scandals and ever-smaller numbers of new priests. He says Church leaders are “hypocrites” who knowingly accept both heterosexual and homosexual relationships, but attack them when they become public:

“There are so many homosexuals, both active and celibate, at all levels of clergy and Church hierarchy that the church would never be able to function if they were really to exclude all of them from ministry,” Cutié writes.

Cutié, who is now an Episcopal priest in Miami, writes in his book that he had begun to grow disillusioned with the Catholic Church even before the scandal of his relationship became news. Especially upsetting to him were “bishops too concerned with their own images” instead of working to protect children from priests who were committing sexual abuse.

(h/t The Advocate)

In a video, first posted by the National Review Online, McCain gets very defensive when pushed by Kerry Eleveld of The Advocate and Chris Geidner of Washington, D.C.’s Metro Weekly about the extent of investigations.

Think Progress’ Wonk Room has a transcipt:

MCCAIN: We do not go out and seek. Regulations are, we do not go out and seek to find out if someone’s sexual orientation. We do not!

ELEVELD: But senator, that’s not…

MCCAIN: That is the fact! That is the fact. Now ma’am, I know the military very well, and I know what’s being done. And what is being done is that they are not seeking out people who are gay. And I don’t care what you say, I know it’s a fact.

ELEVELD: It’s not what I say.

MCCAIN: I dont’ care what you say! And I don’t care what others say. I’ve seen it in action. I’ve seen it in action. I have sons in the military, I know the military very well. So they’re not telling you the truth.

ELEVELD: Senator, just to make sure…

MCCAIN: Just to make sure. We do not go out and seek out and find out….

ELEVELD: Private emails are not being searched? Private emails are not being searched?

MCCAIN: …See if someone is gay or not. We do not go out and see whether someone is gay or not.

ELEVELD: There are documented cases…

MCCAIN: They do not, they do not, they do not. You can say that they are, you can say [inaudible] it’s not true!… Yea, I’d like to see…

GEIDNER: It is the case of Mike Almy, Senators.

MCCAIN: Bring them to our office. It is not the policy, it is not the policy, it is not the policy.

GEIDNER: But it is the case that it’s happening, Senator.

MCCAIN: It is not the policy, it is not the policy, it is not the policy You can say that it is the policy, sir if you choose to. It is not the policy. I would be glad to get that to you in writing.

McCain is known for having a short fuse and his unwillingness to respond to the questions posed by Eleveld and Geidner demonstrate how uncomfortable the issue of DADT is for McCain. It’s also nice to see reporters from the LGBT press pushing Senators on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell given the reluctance many reporters have in asking questions on the topic.

One of the nice things about covering Congress is that members can’t avoid talking to reporters after votes and they are forced to be accessible. The fact that NRO had this video suggests that even NRO was expecting a hearty defense of the law, not a nasty McCain firing back at journalists’ questions.

Sarah Palin

That’s the theory at the gay online magazine The Advocate. The editors at Advocate.com argued the “emasculating” terms used by Palin were “code words” to slam the openly gay Gross, who is an Advocate contributor.

Palin didn’t mention Gross by name while talking Thursday on Sean Hannity’s WABC radio show, but she seemed to be referring to the article — and pointedly used emasculating words that have long been used as euphemisms for homosexuality — when she called reporters who publish “rumors” about her “impotent,” “limp,” and “gutless.”

I’ve heard a lot of “code words” questioning the masculinity of gay men, but “limp” and “impotent” were new ones to me. The folks at the gay Republican group GOPoud seem to agree, issuing a statement to Joe Jervis at JoeMyGod taking-on the Advocate.

It is The Advocate, not Sarah Palin, who is guilty of ‘gay-baiting.’ I don’t think most people associate the words ‘impotent,’ ‘limp,’ or ‘gutless’ with being gay – I know I certainly don’t. If the folks at The Advocate think these words are euphemisms for being gay or lesbian then I think that speaks volumes about their own internalized homophobia. Governor Palin was absolutely right to use the words she chose to describe the pathetic hatchet job penned by Mr. Gross.

GOProud, which is hosting Ann Coulter for a “Homocon” event in New York City, definitely knows how to get some attention and the Advocate appears to be a perfect foil. As Chris Geidner of the Washington, D.C.-based LGBT magazine MetroWeekly says, “[r]egardless of who’s right, score one for GOProud for finding a way to get people talking on a Friday before a long weekend about words and what they mean.”

Although the story reads as if Ambinder had been cultivating Mehlman for years, it’s also evident that Mehlman timed his coming-out story to coincide with his sponsorship of a $5,000 a person fundraiser for American Foundation for Equal Rights, the folks behind the challenge to the anti-gay marriage law in California.

Mehlman, a master at controlling the story and staying on message, didn’t just blurt out his story to Ambinder in an un-planned fashion.  It now appears that a number of people knew about the story even before Mike Rogers went public with the rumor of the coming-out expose that Ambinder was planning. Like all “coming out” stories involving well-known people, it was well-orchestrated by people surrounding Mehlman although there is no evidence he was shopping the coming-out story around to anyone besides Ambinder.

Politico, The Advocate and Huffington Post soon had interviews with Mehlman and admit they knew about the story for at least a couple of days. Here’s what Advocate reporter Kerry Eleveld said in her piece, that went up on Advocate.com Thursday morning.

Mehlman had first discussed his coming out story with Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic, but he had reached out to The Advocate in advance of its publication and made a point of offering his second interview on the matter to an LGBT news outlet.

But if The Advocate got the second interview, they weren’t the first to go live with a follow-up story and interview.  Instead, HuffPost’s Amenda Terkel had an interview up a few hours after the Ambinder story went live based on an interview she did that evening.  Her story was followed quickly by a story by Mike Allen at Politico, who also talked to Mehlman after the Ambinder story went live.

Nico Pitney, national editor at HuffPost, told Mediaite that media outlets learned about the Mehlman announcement “a few days earlier” but that there was never a doubt that Ambinder would break the story.

Rogers, who has been working at outing Mehlman for years, is taking credit for pushing The Atlantic to go at least two days earlier than they wanted with the story. He suggests that Ambinder wanted to dump the story out on a Friday to make follow-up harder and, according to Rogers, so “apologists like Dustin Lance Black and Chad Griffin time to support Ken publicly.”

But Ambinder denies that he was waiting until Friday with the story.  Linda Douglass, The Atlantic’s head of public relations, told Mediaite that the story went live on Wednesday because that’s when the story was done. And in a chat today, Ambinder also dismissed Rogers’ version of the timing.

Very curious how quickly people become interested in the meta-representation of reality (the mechanics behind the story) than the story itself. The story was published when it was published. I talked to Ken late last week and early this week, and wrote the story, had it edited, and then pushed it out.

In 2006, Ambinder wrote about the challenges that Mark Foley scandal created for gay Republicans, including the lavender mafia that surrounded Foley and reached into the Republican establishment. A well-connected openly gay reporter, Ambinder would have the connections inside the web of gay Republicans to convince Mehlman to give him an exclusive.

Ambinder insists that he didn’t know that Mehlman was gay until he admitted it last week, although they had discussed gay-related political issues for many years. In his chat, he said “I haven’t found a single person who says that Ken outed himself to them earlier.” As to the worst keep secret in D.C., Ambinder said  “If I outed everyone I suspected was gay, I’d be a bad person, firstly, and very very busy, secondly.”

In an interview today with the Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz, Ambinder said if he’d known that Mehlman was gay he would have outed him.

“I would have reported it because he was in power at a time when the Republican Party was whipping up anti-gay sentiment to get votes,” Ambinder told Kurtz. “I’m very squeamish about outing anyone. That squeamishness certainly would have gone into the equation. But there would have been a clear and compelling reason. Even though outing would have encroached on his personal dignity, which would have made me uncomfortable, it would have been the right thing to do to hold someone in power accountable.”

That didn’t stop New York Times writer Ashley Parker for gushing that Rep. Aaron Schock (R-Ill.) was a “gay icon” in her breathless fashion feature about the hunky Congressman with the six-pack abs and “interesting” fashion choices.  As FishbowlDC’s Betsy Rothstein points out, Schock has become “media meat” again with other gossip columnists repeating the “gay icon” line.

The gays are having none of it.  The boys at Queerty said that while Schock may be someone you’d want to, well, “meet,” it didn’t mean he was a “gay icon.”  The Advocate also dispelled the notion that Schock deserved icon status.  Radio host and longtime gay activist and journalist Michelangelo Signorile tweeted: “Good point: How can someone who is antigay be a gay icon? Only the NYTimes could tell you.”

So, to clarify.  While the D.C. gays may be talking about Schock and the gay listservs may be “heating up with chatter,” it’s not because Schock is a “gay icon” who has embraced gay causes and gay admirers.  The discussion about his fashion sense and abs and single status isn’t necessarily being done in admiration but, as Queerty explained, “[t]he dude is against same-sex marriage — he is not somebody this community celebrates.”

In celebration of Gay Pride Month and in honor of this important anniversary, Mediaite contributor Robert Newman arranged a series of magazine covers – each “featuring an artist, personality, historical event, or publication of significance in gay history” – and released one per day throughout the month of June on his Newmanology facebook page. Here are some of the highlights from the collection:

The Furies, August 1972. “Lesbian/Feminist Monthly”

This cover from The Furies is today’s entry into the gallery. It only had nine issues, but the magazine was an important part of the lesbian feminist population growing in the early 1970s. In the first issue, the authors wrote that “lesbianism is not a matter of sexual preference, but rather one of political choice which every woman must make if she is to become woman-identified and thereby end male supremacy.”

Time, April 14, 1997. Ellen DeGeneres says, “Yep, I’m Gay.”

Probably the most widely recognized of all the self-outing magazine covers, Ellen‘s appearance on the cover of Time to announce she’s gay opened the door for numerous celebrities to follow in her footsteps. Newmanology put together a side gallery specifically dedicated to the “Yep, I’m Gay”-style cover, featuring celebrities from Lance Bass to Albus Dumbledore.

Interview, December 1972. Andy Warhol and model Naomi Simms.

Andy Warhol, one of the first openly gay American artists, started Interview in 1969, and the entertainment magazine has continued from its inception to feature gay and lesbian-themed content.

After Dark, February 1977. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

After Dark was not designated as a gay publication, but according to Newmanology, this 70s-era entertainment magazine “covered stories of interest to the gay community, carried ads for gay movies, bathhouses, clubs, books, etc., and had a liberal amount of beefcake and male nudity.” Behind this cover, muscleman-turned-actor-turned-governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was featured in a 22-page photo spread, complete with frontal nudity.

Blueboy, June 1977. “The National Magazine About Men.”

Speaking of beefcake, this cover of Blueboy shows how softcore pornographic magazines for gay men developed a mainstream following in the 70s, much like straight counterpart Playboy. And, like Playboy, the magazine included content other than just nudie pics, like essays and interviews. As evidenced by her song “She Bop,” Cyndi Lauper was a devoted fan.

The Advocate, March 5, 1996. Barbara Jordan.

Barbara Jordan, the first African American woman from the South to join Congress who was known for her passionate speeches, never came out publicly. It was only after her death in 1996 that her lesbianism and companionship with another woman, with whom she shared a home, was revealed in this issue of The Advocate.

Christopher Street, January 1978. “Interview with Gore Vidal.”

Newmanology writes that Christopher Street, which ran from 1976 until 1995, “was one the most important national gay publications in its early days, filled with discussions of issues of importance to the gay community, as well as fiction, essays, reviews, and art and photography.” It was also the first gay publication with high-level graphics and design.

One, August 1953. “Homosexual Marriage?”

Remembering the time before the 1969 Stonewall Riots (when gay and lesbian publications were hidden, low-budget journals) Newmanology also has a gallery of magazine covers dating back to the 1950s. Publications like One were the victims of harsh censorship, and their editors and contributors were forced to adopt pen names to avoid being harassed or slapped with criminal charges. This issue of One, which included an article on gay marriage, was seized by the Los Angeles post office for three weeks.

Stories about gay rights might be popping up all over the media these days, but Newmanology’s tribute to Gay Pride Month is a welcome reminder that gays and lesbians have maintained their presence in the media for decades, often forging new journalistic paths in the face of adversity. And that’s something to be proud of.

This is just but a brief sampling – there are many more on the original collection, which you can check out here: Newmanology on Facebook

But as the second day story has become the identity and story of the escort who went on a ten-day European trip with George Alan Rekers, the Advocate’s decision to name Jo-vanni Roman has set off criticism that there was no need to drag the 20-year old into the story.

“It was important for the Advocate to report the story as fully as possible, especially since Rekers has spent his professional career working to prevent gay people from having rights,” the Advocate’s editor-in-chief Jon Barrett told Mediaite.

Barrett said that not disclosing Roman’s name or failing to contact him for his story would have meant that the Advocate wasn’t doing thorough journalism and not fully investigating the claims made by Rekers, who said that the escort was not paid for sex and that Rekers is not gay.

While Roman wouldn’t give much information to the Advocate, he has since spilled his story to the Miami New Times, a Miami alternative weekly that broke the Rekers story.  In his interview with the New Times, Roman–who is being given the name “Lucien”– has detailed that the relationship was sexual and he contends Rekers is gay. “Lucien” was first identified by a porn website and then picked up by the gay blogosphere.

“If we hadn’t reported who this kid was, he may not have told the Miami paper what he did,” Barrett suggested. “Our goal wasn’t to exploit him, but the reality is that the escort is now a part of the story and we have an obligation to report that part of the story.”

But the decision to give his name was greeted with some hostility by commenters on the story.  One commenter, “Jon,” wrote:  “Shame on the Advocate for putting up this kid’s photo, full name, and telling what school he goes to. That could very well ruin his life–keep him from moving into another line of employment and maybe getting him kicked out of college.”

For Joe Jervis, the New York blogger who presides over the successful blog JoeMyGod, the irony of the backlash he’s received for reporting Roman’s name is that he was just reporting what the Advocate had done.

“People are feeling very protective of this kid in the community,” Jervis told Mediaite, “so there’s a sense that we need to close ranks around him.”

At his blog, Jervis said that Roman’s career decisions weren’t the issue and that he has no problem with sex workers.  Instead, the question was whether getting information about the escort and details of the services he provided helped shed light on the man Jervis says has “arguably done the most damage to gay families as anyone in the country” because of his work testifying against gay adoption.

Roman is not the first escort to feel the glare of attention after a sex scandal erupts. Ashley DuPre, the prostitute at the center of the Elliot Spitzer scandal, initially avoided the press and regretted being identified by the New York Times. While now embracing her fame by posing in Playboy and working as a New York Post sex columnist, some were critical of outing DuPre arguing she was a victim in the story.

Mike Jones–the escort at the center of the Ted Haggard affair–also found the attention rather unflattering, even thought Jones was the one who went public with the story.  In his book, he said he regrets the way he was depicted by the press as an attention-seeking hustler.

As Barrett puts it, however, the fact that Roman and other escorts caught up in sex scandals have advertised in public places with pictures, phone numbers, and names takes a bit off the allegation that their privacy was invaded. In e-mail communications with the Advocate, Barrett said Roman has used his name as past of the email address.

“We are talking about a young man who has his name and phone number on a website where he describes what he does for a living,” Barrett said

While Roman has promised to tell more about his story now that the confessions have begun, Jervis questions whether there’s really a lot more of his story that’s of interest.

“Now that we have credibly confirmation of what took place in Europe, Giovanni ends his usefulness in the story,” Jervis explained.  The attention should now be back on Rekers, Jervis concluded, where there are questions about how much money he was paid to testify on behalf of the state of Florida in opposition to gay adoption and information about Rekers’ own adoption of a child who is only a few years younger than Roman.

People magazine posted a short announcement this morning that Wright was coming out in the magazine and in a May 5 media blitz, but it was the Advocate that gives the whole story on Wright’ decision to announce she was a lesbian, the first for a country music star (assuming you don’t count k.d. Lang, I guess).

“Even in a year already full of celebrity outings, Wright’s emergence as an out lesbian is truly something of a big deal, especially considering the world from which she is emerging. Not only is she arguably the first big name in contemporary country music to come out of the closet, she also happens to be doing so in a very big way,” the Advocate says in a lengthy profile.

Bragman, who has become a coming-out specialist as a publicist, set-off a couple of weeks of sepculation when he said a major celebrity would come out in May 5.  While the early money was on country music star Shelby Lynne or  Queen Latifah, Wright emerged over the weekend after gay blog Queerty also started floating her name after an email from a People insider.

Because that’s exactly what happened when longtime Rep. Babette Josephs said of her opponent, 29-year-old (and looks even younger than that) Gregg Kravitz (pictured), “I outed him as a straight person.” She also caustically criticized him for supposedly using the phrase “I swing both ways” to describe his sexual orientation: “That’s quite a respectful way to talk about sexuality.” The issue is so highly politicized because the 182nd district, located in Philadelphia, is noted for the influence of LGBT voters there.

According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, Josephs said Kravitz first claimed to be gay, but later met her with a girlfriend in tow. Of course, if Kravitz only claimed to be bisexual, a girlfriend would hardly be damning evidence of an elaborate lie. For his part, Kravitz told Talking Points Memo that he’s had “‘intimate relationships’ with both men and women.” The TPM interview isn’t the only political mileage Kravitz has gotten out of Josephs’ unusual accusations: Newsweek’s media and politics blog The Gaggle covered the story, and Kravitz tweeted out additional publicity the issue received from The Advocate and Politico.

And how does the LGBT community feel about this? Well, they’re pretty happy. Explains Philadelphia Gay News publisher Mark Segal, “We’ve hit a new high point when candidates are accused of pretending to be gay to win a seat.” And those accusations may help Kravitz win: Josephs doesn’t seem interested in pursuing the sexual orientation angle further, telling TPM she “[doesn't] even care” about the issue anymore – a sure sign it’s not working in her favor. Josephs is notoriously outspoken, also saying of Kravitz:

“He’s a trust-fund baby, he has as much money as needs; he does not have a job, he’s 29 years old, he’s never had a job; and so 24/7, he is out there talking to my friends, my supporters, my constituents, and saying, ‘She’s entrenched. She’s part of the problem.’ And I’ve been told he’s even said, ‘She’s old.’”

Her feistiness, while terrific for blogging purposes, hasn’t done her any favors here. Even if she retains her seat, the real star of this whole mess is Kravitz, who rose from total obscurity to starring role in one of the more unique political stories in recent years. When even French Canada is blogging about a state House of Representatives race, it’s clear they’ve hit a nerve, and it appears Kravitz knows just how to capitalize.

In addition, NBC will be able to call on Advocate reporters, including White House reporter Kerry Eleveld who was recently interviewed by Tommy Christopher for Mediaite, when reporting on gay and lesbian issues.

“We are building-out an Advocate block of programming on the here! networks, using pieces that have run online at Advocate.com and content provided by NBC,” Macias said.  The Advocate debuted a monthly newsmagazine in February, which is already running on here!.

Macias said that once staff was trained to use NBC content, stories from the network, affiliates, and international partners would be placed online at Advocate.com and then repackaged for here! networks.  He said there would also be additional reporting and analysis by Here Media staff.

The ultimate goal, Macias said, was to use NBC content online but also to bolster a daily or weekly news broadcast for television subscribers, with some stories also available on the Advocate’s website.

The Advocate has long been considered the news magazine of record for LGBT issues, but the brand has suffered over the last decade after it grappled for an identity. In October 2009, the magazine was thrown into chaos when staff were laid off and Here Media announced the magazine would no longer be a stand-alone magazine but instead only be available in print to subscribers of its more sexy brother, Out. The magazines have recently become fodder for Gawker gossip after allegedly failing to timely pay freelancers.

Under the control of editorial director Jon Barrett–who oversees online, print, and video efforts at the Advocate–the magazine launched a monthly video newsmagazine in February, hosted by former CNN anchor Thomas Roberts. When Here Media announced it was shuttering much of the print version of the Advocate, Here Media CEO Paul Colichman said “professionally created video news content” was the future and the reason four Advocate staff members were let go.

There is currently no nationwide daily television newscast geared towards the LGBT community.  CBS News on Logo, the failed attempt on LGBT channel LOGO, ended in 2008 and 365 Gay News powered by CBS News died a year later.

In a statement, NBC News Channel president Bob Horner said “[w]e respect the commitment Here Media has to its community and we look forward to assisting The Advocate in its coverage of the issues important to the LGBT community.

Knowing people were clamoring to see expert testimony by economic experts and anti-gay ministers, John Ireland and John Ainsworth are giving the trial the “let’s put on a show” treatment and reenacting the trial in a University of Southern California law school courtroom with actors filling in for the judge, lawyers, and witnesses.

“There is a huge buzz on the web about this trial,” USC law professor and video consultant David B. Cruz said in a statement announcing the project. “I think a lot of people across our country were poised to watch the opening statements on the first day.  When access was blocked, the thirst for information just grew exponentially.”

When Ireland and Ainsworth first announced they were going to re-enact the trial, they said they were basing their scripts on liveblogging by progressive blogger Firedoglake, gay rights grassroots activists Courage Campaignand other bloggers.  That plan has been altered, according to their website, by the release of actual transcripts provided by the attorneys challenging Proposition 8.

In the just-released preview, the men have done a great job of getting an actor who looks a lot like Judge Vaughn Walker. The preview reel is pretty dry, which means they are likely being very accurate about what is going on inside the courtroom. The video project’s creators–who both opposed Proposition 8–have vowed to keep things neutral and it will be interesting to see how the re-enactment gets edited and produced as the project advances.

The decision to block broadcasts has put a chill on same-sex marriage advocates’ desire to get their message out via video.  What was expected to be a public relations and legal coup has meant that same-sex marriage supporters–who have been very successful at using social media and viral video in their losing efforts to win marriage battles–have turned to other ways to get information out about the trial.

With the judge overseeing the case opening up the courtroom to laptop and texting, citizen journalists (and activists groups) have used the opportunity to tweet and liveblog the trial in ways rarely seen before in a federal court case.  Using the hashtag #Prop8, tweeters inside the courtroom have been giving a play-by-play of the trial. Some of the best have included Dan Levine (@fedcourtjunkie) of The Recorder, The Advocate (@TheAdvocateMag), two tweeters with the National Center for Lesbian Rights (@NCLRights and @Chris_Stoll) and the tweets by the American Foundation for Equal Rights, the folks funding the lawsuit ( @AmerEqualRights).

Opponents have been late to the social media game and are not doing much coverage of the trial. The Alliance Defense Fund ( @ADFMedia) has been tweeting the trial and ProtectMarriage has been doing limited blogging.

Despite the wall-to-wall coverage by the progressive and LGBT blogosphere, the trial has not exactly been full of legal revelations.  The expert testimony has been cathartic for same-sex marriage supporters, but unsurprising. Until late this week, there have been few fireworks in the courtroom with none of the bombshells which are likely to get people tuned-in to the trial.

That changed when there was finally a heated dispute over admitting evidence of religious groups’ involvement in pushing Prop 8 and some fascinating testimony by a defendant who wanted to be dropped from the case because he feared attacks from Prop 8 opponents and said he relied on the Internet for evidence that homosexuality was bad for marriage.

With the trial about to end, the producers need to start releasing the videos or interest in the trial could wain.  Still, who doesn’t want to kick back and watch a little expert evidence cross-examination on YouTube.

Using the example of GLAAD’s flip-flopping on ABC’s treatment of Adam Lambert, Signorile said in the Advocate that ABC’s financial contributions to GLAAD clouded the group’s response. But GLAAD chief Jarrett Barrios has fired back, also in the Advocate, saying Signorile has his facts wrong and that the organization has not trouble criticizing the networks, who only provide about one percent of the organization’s budget.

Criticizing GLAAD has long been a popular past time among many LGBT activists and bloggers, who have questioned the organization’s cozy relationship with Hollywood and the networks and accuse the group of having mission creep. That criticism came to a crescendo in December when GLAAD was forced to issue a series of press releases explaining its ever-changing position on whether ABC showed homophobia in its ban on Adam Lambert.

For Signorile and other activists, GLAAD’s chief problem is that it is more interested in not upsetting donors than raising concerns about how LGBT people are portrayed in the media.

“At the heart of the controversy is a simple fact: GLAAD solicits money from networks and entertainment companies and then hands them awards for what the organization deems positive media representation of the LGBT community,” Signorile said. “Media companies receiving the awards—many of which often engage in or perpetuate the very bias and defamation that GLAAD crusades against—sponsor the celebrity-strewn benefits and underwrite the performances in return for branding opportunities and choice tables.”

Barrios rejected the argument that GLAAD was afraid to criticize its donors, detailing a series of efforts the organization has waged against the networks who provide a tiny amount of donations. “Does it really stand to reason that so few who contribute so little proportionally have so much influence? No, it doesn’t,” Barrios argued in his rebuttal.

In the end, it’s likely both sides have a point.

GLAAD has long had a controversial relationship with the community it is supposed to advocate for and, as the media climate has improved for LGBTs, the organization does seem more interested in handing out awards than being a vocal, consistent watchdog. The handling of ABC’s response to the Lambert controversy had a bit of a train-wreck feel to it. And the perception that the organization’s relationship with the networks and studios  harms its ability to be an advocate is one that GLAAD hasn’t successfully dealt with.

In GLAAD’s defense, it is true that an advocacy group can criticize the people who it also takes money from. Networks like ABC/Disney aren’t donating money to GLAAD in order to avoid criticism, but instead for the public relations benefit that comes from associating with organizations that encourage positive portrayals of LGBT people. Finally, if it is true that networks only contribute one percent of the budget–financial transparency has never been one of GLAAD’s strong points–then it’s hard to believe they can be bought by such a small amount of money.

There’s always a tension between how activists believe giant advocacy groups like GLAAD should operate and how those groups actually are run.  GLAAD’s insider status almost certainly helps it resolve problems and get a response from the corporate media and studios it works with.  But that response and insider approach isn’t going to be satisfying for activists looking for a full-throated attack on behalf of their agenda.

The closing of the Blade and other Window Media ventures occurred just weeks after the nation’s most prominent LGBT newsmagazine, The Advocate, announced that it would no longer be a stand-alone publication, but instead be packaged with its sexy gay brother in Chelsea, Out magazine. The fall of the Advocate as a stand-alone print product occurred because its owners, Regent Media, no longer believed it could afford to market two print products while also pursuing online efforts.

When two of the most prominent LGBT publications take a major hit, it’s easy to begin asking whether this represents the death of the LGBT press. I mean, if the Washington Blade and the Advocate can’t weather tough times, what does it say about everyone else?

Like other “minority” media, it is easy to underestimate the significance of the LGBT press for the gay community. For many of us, it was the first glimpse into what it meant to be gay or lesbian or bisexual or transgender. We opened up those newspapers tentatively, almost afraid of what we would discover about ourselves and the world around us. We turn to the LGBT press to find out what’s happening on our street, to find a church, to find a lawyer, and even find a boyfriend or girlfriend.

As Jon Barrett–the editor in chief of the Advocate—described at Advocate.com when lamenting the closure of the Blade, “[g]ay media is a huge part of who we are as gay people. I say this not only as the editor in chief of the country’s longest-running gay magazine, but as a guy who, as a closeted 20-something, picked up his first-ever gay newspaper, the Washington Blade, at Lambda Rising [a legendary gay bookstore in Washington, D.C.] on his way home from class back in 1994. That paper was a window to how I hoped I could live someday. “

In a time where kids grow up with a Gay-Straight Alliance at their high school and same-sex marriage is the hot political issue du jour, the role of the legacy LGBT press may seem less important. LGBT people—whether they are “out” or not—can go online for information and see their lives discussed in any number of settings, so do they need to still turn to publications like the Advocate or the Blade or Southern Voice?

These publications also get criticized for their relevance and focus. In a disjointed attack on her former publication (that was later pulled from Huffington Post because it was a “draft”), former Advocate editor Judy Wieder questioned the white, gay-male focus of the Advocate and suggested that it was largely becoming irrelevant. Under her leadership, the Advocate was criticized for being “too Hollywood” and for featuring too many straight celebrities on its cover.

Similarly, the Blade has been criticized for being “too inside-the-beltway,” which is code for a little closeted, a little conservative, and too status-quo. After a stormy era when hustler-turned-White House correspondent Jeff Gannon/James Guckert was given a regular column, the Blade has struggled to shake-off the perception the paper was too mainstream, too white and wealthy, and not activist enough.

The irony of the fall of the Advocate and the Blade is that LGBT journalism is booming, at least when it comes to citizen journalism. From Pam Spaulding’s Pam’s House Blend and John Aravosis’ AmericaBlog to Andy Towle’s Towleroad and Joe Jervis’ JoeMyGod, LGBT voices are everywhere in the political and LGBT blogosphere. This citizen journalism takes many forms, from the progressive political coverage by Spaulding and Aravosis to the popular coverage by Towle and Jervis that mixes pictures of Levi Johnston in Playgirl and 80s disco videos with news about Proposition 8 and hate crimes. But the constant thread is that they rely on the mainstream press—and legacy LGBT media—to keep their operations running.

They rely on reporters like Kerry Eleveld, the Washington correspondent for the Advocate, and Lou Chibbarro Jr. and Chris Johnson of the Blade to cover the ins-and-outs of the LGBT agenda at the White House and Congress. It wasn’t until Eleveld started pressing Obama’s Press Secretary Robert Gibbs about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell that mainstream reporters like ABC’s Jake Tapper started asking the same questions.

The mainstream press and citizen journalists also rely on the LGBT legacy press to provide the manpower and reporting skills on the stories inside the gay community that just aren’t on their radar . . . yet. Whether it’s the recent police raid on the Atlanta Eagle or the ongoing investigation of a D.C. murder in the home of a prominent gay activist, it was Southern Voice and the Washington Blade that was there first.

That’s something that even the Washington Post recognizes, arguing in a Nov. 18 editorial that:

The Blade’s importance to our area cannot be overstated. From the HIV/AIDS epidemic to hate crimes to the drive for marriage equality, the paper reported stories that the mainstream press initially didn’t or wouldn’t cover. And in the quest for fairness, it held people accountable — gay and straight, elected officials and community leaders. Because of that, the Washington Blade, with more than 250,000 unique visitors to its Web site each month and a circulation of 23,000, was considered the paper of record by gays and lesbians across the country. Control of its archive of papers and photographs at its offices in the National Press Club is now in the hands of a bankruptcy trustee. Every effort should be made to keep the archive accessible to researchers and historians.

Before the eulogies for the LGBT press are written, it’s important to point out that it was the corporate owners of these publications that ultimately got into financial troubles. The Washington Blade was profitable, but Window Media was hemorrhaging money even after the SBA gave it a $38 million loan. The Advocate has been shifted around from owner to owner after several corporations–LPI Media to PlanetOut Partners to Regent Media—have failed to turn a profit despite success at the Advocate. And declining ad dollars—as well as Craigslist’s lock on classifieds and hook-up ads—have meant even less money for the legacy players.

Ultimately, the LGBT legacy media will survive, although maybe not in the same form. The Advocate is increasingly an online-driven publication expected to launch a television product in 2010. While the Blade will no longer exist in name, its former editors and staff are already planning offering something new—both in print and online–but without the baggage of its corporate owners. But will have the same resources? Will there be reporter asking the questions about what’s going on at the police station and city hall, something citizen journalists have struggled to achieve? And where will young LGBT people—and newly “out” older LGBT folks—first learn about their community and find the lawyer they need, the church that gives them strength and support . . . and the boyfriend or girlfriend that will become their husband or wife?

Michael R. Triplett is an writer in Washington, D.C.. He works for a legal and policy publisher and spent 8 years covering the Supreme Court, Congress, and several federal agencies. He is on the national board of the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association and blogs at http://www.reacttoyournews.org/. His Twitter page is http://twitter.com/MRTriplett.