Another National Enquirer affair story

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
8
0
The Enquirer story first ran in October of last year.

The MSM did not really start talking about the story until July after the Edwards run in at the Beverly Hills Hotel.

Even Mark Penn, Bill and Hillary's chief advisor says the same: "On Tuesday, the mainstream media, which never looked into allegations against John Edwards that turned out to be true and might have affected the race"
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
8
0
Wonderful bit from the NY Times about how the media ignored the Edwards story
can't link because it came from a search engine.
For almost 10 months, the story of John Edwards?s affair remained the nearly exclusive province of the National Enquirer ? through reports, denials, news of a pregnancy, questions about paternity and, finally, a slapstick chase through a hotel in Beverly Hills.

Political blogs, some cable networks and a few newspapers reported on it ? or, more accurately, reported on The Enquirer reporting on it. Jay Leno and David Letterman made Mr. Edwards the butt of jokes on their late-night shows, but their own networks declined to report on the rumors surrounding him on the evening news. Why?

A number of news organizations with resources far greater than The Enquirer?s, like The New York Times, say they looked into the Edwards matter and found nothing solid enough to report, while others did not look at all.

Some of their comments point to a lack of interest in a story about the private conduct of an also-ran presidential candidate, and a distaste for following the lead of a publication they hold in low esteem. Only in Mr. Edwards?s home state, North Carolina, did newspapers aggressively chase the story in the last few weeks.

On Friday, Phil Bronstein, the former editor of The San Francisco Chronicle, in his blog on that paper?s Web site, poked fun at the reticence of the mainstream media, ?picking at it with their noses held, as if looking for something valuable in a moldy dumpster.?

?On journalism sites, the finger-pointing, self-loathing, self-righteousness and tut-tutting was massive,? he wrote. ?Does anyone really think that a story splashed in the tabs and debated on blogs like a powerful fire backdraft is somehow not part of the public discourse??

The Enquirer first reported the affair in October, and it reported in December that the woman, Rielle Hunter, who had done video production work for the campaign, was pregnant and that Mr. Edwards was the father.

At the time, Mr. Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina, was still very much a presidential candidate, though polls showed him running a distant third for the Democratic nomination. He denied the allegations, and a campaign aide said he, not the candidate, was the father ? and Ms. Hunter agreed.

The Los Angeles Times published one brief item in October, focusing on Mr. Edwards?s denial of an affair. The New York Daily News wrote about it a few times over the months. But the three broadcast network newscasts, the three cable news networks, and most of the major newspapers and magazines did not say a word.

On July 22, the Enquirer said that one of its reporters had caught Mr. Edwards visiting the mother and child at the Beverly Hilton, and chased him through the hotel. The general media?s resistance started to crack then, and it began crumbling after The Enquirer, on Wednesday, published what it said were pictures of that hotel rendezvous, including a grainy photo showing what looked to be Mr. Edwards holding a baby.

Fox News Channel, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Miami Herald and the Web site of New York Magazine were among those that first mentioned The Enquirer reports in late July. MSNBC did so only back-handedly, by showing a clip of Mr. Letterman joking about it.

The Charlotte Observer and The News & Observer of Raleigh have each written about the matter several times over the last nine days, and a Los Angeles Times blog took it up.

But many news organizations ? including The New York Times ? weighed in only after ABC News announced on Friday that it had an interview with Mr. Edwards, in which he admitted the affair but denied paternity.

?These kinds of allegations fly around about just about every candidate,? said Leonard Downie Jr., executive editor of The Washington Post, which had not written about the affair until Friday. ?We checked them out and we asked questions, and at no time did we have any facts to report.?

After Mr. Edwards dropped out of the race last winter, it was not clear that there was any relevance to the story, Mr. Downie said. The Post began looking into it more seriously in the last few weeks, in light of a possible Edwards role at the Democratic convention or in a Barack Obama administration.

CNN, which first mentioned the affair on Friday, ?had been working the story since it first broke in The Enquirer late last year,? said Sam Feist, the political director. ?We sent people to Chapel Hill, we sent people to California.?

But, he said, ?Edwards denied it, the woman denied it,? and ?you have to have some sort of evidence before you put something on the air.?

Paul Friedman, senior vice president of CBS News, said the network did not actively pursue the story when it broke last fall. Asked if that was because it had first appeared in The National Enquirer, he said, ?Exactly.?

In the months since then, Mr. Friedman said, CBS kept track of the story but did not actively pursue it. ?We saw no reason to make his life or the life of his family any worse, until it became well-documented or he admitted it, which is what happened today,? he said.

The New York Times looked into the Enquirer reports last fall, though none too aggressively, editors said.

Bill Keller, the executive editor, said in an e-mail message that Mr. Edwards?s dark-horse status and the ?added hold-your-nose quality about The Enquirer? contributed to the lack of interest by The Times and the mainstream media generally.

Like Mr. Downie, he said that the questions seemed irrelevant once Mr. Edwards was out of the race, but that recently, The Times had ?tried to ascertain whether the cloud generated by The Enquirer?s reporting had influenced the Obama campaign in its thinking about a future role for Edwards.?
Amazing how much self restraint the media showed in the Edwards affair and how little they show in the Palin 'affair'

 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,120
48,181
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Amazing how much self restraint the media showed in the Edwards affair and how little they show in the Palin 'affair'

Wait a minute, you are asking why news outlets are giving more credence to National Enquirer stories about prominent politicians when they were proven correct just over a month ago?

I don't know, I guess I would have to go with the absolutely insanely obvious answer. Then again, I'm not a conservative with a persecution complex who desperately needs the media to be against me to validate my world view.
 

QED

Diamond Member
Dec 16, 2005
3,428
3
0
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Amazing how much self restraint the media showed in the Edwards affair and how little they show in the Palin 'affair'

Wait a minute, you are asking why news outlets are giving more credence to National Enquirer stories about prominent politicians when they were proven correct just over a month ago?

I don't know, I guess I would have to go with the absolutely insanely obvious answer. Then again, I'm not a conservative with a persecution complex who desperately needs the media to be against me to validate my world view.

The National Enquirer has a pretty good track record on this kind of thing going further back than just John Edwards-- they were outscooping the mainstream press back in the OJ trial days.

So now the excuse is the Mainstream media learned to take the National Enquirer seriously only recently after the John Edwards incident?
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
8
0
Nah, I am pointing out the hypocrisy of our fellow posters.

I wish I could remember what thread the topic came up in, but quite a few of them defended the media for ignoring the Enquirer's story on Edwards.
A few hours ago the Enquirer was a trashy tabloid, now it is a newspaper worthy of respect.

Let's see if this story goes anywhere. Sadly the Enquirer has a history of writing stories that being with the line "Sources say" without ever talking about who those sources are. Basically the garbage man could create a good story and sell it to them.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
349
126
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Nah, I am pointing out the hypocrisy of our fellow posters.

I wish I could remember what thread the topic came up in, but quite a few of them defended the media for ignoring the Enquirer's story on Edwards.
A few hours ago the Enquirer was a trashy tabloid, now it is a newspaper worthy of respect.

Let's see if this story goes anywhere. Sadly the Enquirer has a history of writing stories that being with the line "Sources say" without ever talking about who those sources are. Basically the garbage man could create a good story and sell it to them.

No hypocrisy here - go get my quote on the Edwards story and my position is the same.

It's an unreliable paper who sometimes gets scoops and sometimes prints lies.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
8
0
Originally posted by: eskimospy
I'm just waiting for all the people who talked about how right the National Enquirer is to come out and start trashing it.
Nah... we can just quote you instead
Ahh, I see you think that the NYT should re-print National Enquirer stories. Just because a newspaper prints some things that turn out to be unreliable does not mean that they should take all unreliable sources and print them.

This should be obvious to anyone with a functioning brain, but I'm sure it's all just another librul conspiracy, Pro-Jo.
and
You aren't being serious are you? And are you really talking about "made up BS to discredit the Enquirer" as if it needs discrediting? Do you know how many times it has been sued for printing false stories? Maybe... just maybe... the way it collects information makes it so it will sometimes scoop other papers, but other times will print egregious falsehoods it gets sued for.

The NYT, being the most highly respected paper in the US, needs to have higher standards than that.
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,281
0
0
the gift that keeps on giving.

Thanks, mccain, for that maverick vp pick. And the fact that it has so many repug panties in a wad is just icing.

I should make a template since I suspect this isn't going to be the last revelation (biblical reference not intentional).
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,281
0
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Nah, I am pointing out the hypocrisy of our fellow posters.

I wish I could remember what thread the topic came up in, but quite a few of them defended the media for ignoring the Enquirer's story on Edwards.
A few hours ago the Enquirer was a trashy tabloid, now it is a newspaper worthy of respect.

Let's see if this story goes anywhere. Sadly the Enquirer has a history of writing stories that being with the line "Sources say" without ever talking about who those sources are. Basically the garbage man could create a good story and sell it to them.
You're right - it was quite embarrassing. Hopefully, they learned something.
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,567
6
81
Hmmm. Wouldn't it be grand if the father of Palin's Down Syndrome child were this other man? That would be tooooo perfect, as it would show not only that she cheated on her husband but that she's so irresponsible that she ended up giving birth to another man's child.

And maybe Bristol found out about it and was so disgusted with her mother's self-righteous and hypocritical positions on abstinence and sex out of wedlock that she ended up screwing that soccer jock in a rebellious huff.

God but I love politics.
 

QED

Diamond Member
Dec 16, 2005
3,428
3
0
Originally posted by: shira
Hmmm. Wouldn't it be grand if the father of Palin's Down Syndrome child were this other man? That would be tooooo perfect, as it would show not only that she cheated on her husband, but that she's so irresponsible that she ended up giving birth to another man's child.

And maybe Bristol found out about it and was so disgusted with her mother's self-righteous and hypocritical positions on abstinence and sex out of wedlock, that she ended up screwing that soccer jock in a rebellious huff.

God but I love politics.

Wow, you really are living in your own little fantasy world.

 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
46,053
8,788
136
Originally posted by: QED
Originally posted by: shira
Hmmm. Wouldn't it be grand if the father of Palin's Down Syndrome child were this other man? That would be tooooo perfect, as it would show not only that she cheated on her husband, but that she's so irresponsible that she ended up giving birth to another man's child.

And maybe Bristol found out about it and was so disgusted with her mother's self-righteous and hypocritical positions on abstinence and sex out of wedlock, that she ended up screwing that soccer jock in a rebellious huff.

God but I love politics.

Wow, you really are living in your own little fantasy world.

Gotta' agree. And, call me naive, but my gut reaction is that this is one of the many + times that that Enquirer is running trash on skimpy evidence.

I oppose Palin's candidacy for her stance on several key issues. I don't need gutter accusations, thank you very much.

 

dennilfloss

Past Lifer 1957-2014 In Memoriam
Oct 21, 1999
30,549
12
0
dennilfloss.blogspot.com
Originally posted by: shira
Hmmm. Wouldn't it be grand if the father of Palin's Down Syndrome child were this other man? That would be tooooo perfect, as it would show not only that she cheated on her husband but that she's so irresponsible that she ended up giving birth to another man's child.

Maury! Maury! Maury!

"Todd... You are NOT the father!!!":D

 
Feb 6, 2007
16,432
1
81
It's the National Enquirer. It is pointless trash. Next week they'll be printing stories about Palin's "Beach Bod" (is she one of the best or the worst... inquiring minds want to know!) alongside the latest Elvis sighting and a revolutionary new pill that actually reverses the aging process by turning back time itself. So they managed to get it right with the Edwards affair. Congratulations, their batting average is up to .006. Anyone who seriously takes stock in this... well, I've got some magic beans to sell you.
 

jackschmittusa

Diamond Member
Apr 16, 2003
5,972
1
0
Actually, I don't much care who gets a little on the side. Don't think it's that big a deal.

But it's always a lot more fun when it's a Republican since they are such freaks about "family values".

I could only hope that his business partner is a woman. What a gut splitter that would be.
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,442
32
91

Does anyone besides myself think it's possible that some of her Alaskan acquaintances might die mysterious deaths in the very near future?

Troopergate, Librariangate, Daughtergate...and now this.

I'm still waiting to find out whether Palin's husband is the father of her seventeen year old daughter's baby. I know that that prospect is going far out on a limb, but it would be exquisitely juicy if it were true.

 
Oct 30, 2004
11,442
32
91

What would be even better is if McCain and Palin are elected and they get caught banging each other in the Oval Office. The President banging the VP. Now, that would make for a juicy story!
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,643
2,037
126
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: eskimospy
I'm just waiting for all the people who talked about how right the National Enquirer is to come out and start trashing it.
Nah... we can just quote you instead
Ahh, I see you think that the NYT should re-print National Enquirer stories. Just because a newspaper prints some things that turn out to be unreliable does not mean that they should take all unreliable sources and print them.

This should be obvious to anyone with a functioning brain, but I'm sure it's all just another librul conspiracy, Pro-Jo.
and
You aren't being serious are you? And are you really talking about "made up BS to discredit the Enquirer" as if it needs discrediting? Do you know how many times it has been sued for printing false stories? Maybe... just maybe... the way it collects information makes it so it will sometimes scoop other papers, but other times will print egregious falsehoods it gets sued for.

The NYT, being the most highly respected paper in the US, needs to have higher standards than that.

:laugh:

It'll be interesting to see how Eskimospy spins this one.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

What would be even better is if McCain and Palin are elected and they get caught banging each other in the Oval Office. The President banging the VP. Now, that would make for a juicy story!
I doubt McCranky could get it up.

 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,643
2,037
126
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

What would be even better is if McCain and Palin are elected and they get caught banging each other in the Oval Office. The President banging the VP. Now, that would make for a juicy story!
I doubt McCranky could get it up.

For her, he probably could.
 

JJChicken

Diamond Member
Apr 9, 2007
6,168
16
81
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
Originally posted by: shira
Hmmm. Wouldn't it be grand if the father of Palin's Down Syndrome child were this other man? That would be tooooo perfect, as it would show not only that she cheated on her husband but that she's so irresponsible that she ended up giving birth to another man's child.

Maury! Maury! Maury!

"Todd... You are NOT the father!!!":D

LMAO