The Erin Andrews peephole video has touched a nerve with many in the sports and news community, me included. In case you were out of the country for the past week, a video was posted on the internet that was allegedly of a naked Andrews in a hotel room, apparently taken through a peephole from an adjacent room. The video was then given credibility when Andrews’ lawyers, and counsel for ESPN, began contacting the various websites that had posted the video. [NOTE: To those of you who try to search for the video, beware. Many of the supposed videos out there right now contain viruses for  both Mac and Windows computers.]

The video has generated outrage from all over the sports and news world, and has imposed what I can only imagine is limitless amounts of humiliation upon Andrews. Unfortunately, those of us in the blogging community [and quite frankly anyone that watches ET or buys US Weekly] are too used to this kind of celebrity sex scandal.

We are constantly barraged with celebrities sunning topless on the beaches of the Caribbean, or driving around Hollywood without underwear, or “hacked” cell phone photos of compromising situations. How often are there rumors, or actual copies, of celebrity sex videos? I do not feel bad for the subjects in these situations because they are often times staged, or at the very least the people should know better than to walk around topless on a beach or go commando in a short skirt while partying on Sunset Boulevard amongst a throng of paparazzi.

That being said, the Erin Andrews video scandal is just flat out wrong. First off, it is a complete and utter violation of her privacy, well beyond the realm of topless beach photos or leaked sex videos. Andrews is a sideline sports reporter for ESPN, not Britney Spears. Not that this would be anymore right if it happened to Spears, but that kind of privacy violation seems to come with the territory of being an ultra-celebrity. But it is not implied as part of the job of a sports reporter.

While Andrews has gained considerable notoriety for being a very attractive woman in a field of generally mediocre looking talent, this crushes her credibility in the field entirely. It will be hard now for anyone to watch her on the sidelines of an Eagles-Cowboys game, discussing the latest in-game injury to Brian Westbrook without picturing her naked.

Sports journalism is a hard industry for women to break into, and it is an unfortunate, but real fact of life, that a woman’s looks play a large part in her success. It is hard for macho men to take a woman seriously when she is discussing or analyzing sports, but that is somehow made more palatable when she is attractive. It’s almost as if we, as men, say, “I don’t really think this chick knows what she’s talking about, but I’ll tolerate her because she’s fun to look at.” That really sucks, but it’s an unfortunate reality. I am a pretty liberal guy, and have no problem listening to a woman analyze sports and taking her seriously as she does it, but even I find myself rating her looks as I watch her. I admit that I prefer some female sports reporters over others in part because they are more attractive.

Unfortunately for Andrews, her looks have worked against her. She was almost too good looking, and was too attractive a target for this kind of attack. I genuinely hope that this ultimately does not greatly impact her career. While I was never blown away by Andrews’ reporting, I found her to be an adequate and informative reporter, and I hope she continues on ESPN for years to come.