SiteStory? What story?
If you’ve been reading the mainstream media, you’re probably unaware that there’s a story brewing with former presidential candidate John Edwards. In a nutshell, a couple weeks ago, the National Enquirer (yes, that National Enquirer) claims its reporters and photographers caught Edwards in LA emerging from the hotel room of his mistress and their “love child.” A keystone-cop chase through the hotel ensued, until staff security rescued Edwards from a bathroom, where the reporters had him cornered for 15 minutes.
I’ve been fascinated by this story, specifically, mainstream media’s handling of it. (Personally, I don’t care who politicians sleep with, as long as they’re not sleeping with my husband or, God forbid, my child. But I’m aware that for most Americans, a politician’s private life is a big deal.) One LA Times editor forbade bloggers from blogging about this story because it came from the scurrilous National Enquirer (although I believe one blogger didn’t read the memo and blogged about it anyway). Other major news organizations around the country, print and broadcast, haven’t touched the story either, citing the dubious source of reporting and/or taking a wait-and-see position, a position that in my mind that’s essentially a let’s-turn-a-blind-eye stance.
Now the Enquirer has released photos they claim show Edwards holding his “love child.” I’m hearing rumblings that there are even more damning pictures, and the tabloid is waiting until the Democratic convention to release them. Edwards hasn’t denied the allegations. The mainstream media still maintains its wall of silence. I wonder: is the news media being protective of Edwards, particularly Elizabeth Edwards? Do they really believe this is just a garbage story? I’m no fan of McCain’s, but it seems like the venerable New York Times had no problem reporting on a supposed affair he had with an associate with far less evidence to base their story upon.
I’m curious … what do you all think? A media conspiracy or is the Enquirer’s “bust” just not news? [db]
8 Responses to “Story? What story?”
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Tiff
Said this on August 6th, 2008 at 6:47pm:“Personally, I don’t care who politicians sleep with, as long as they’re not sleeping with my husband or, God forbid, my child.” I agree with this, Diana.
Maybe part of it is because Edwards is no longer a candidate for president?
Why politicians think they can get away with anything these days is beyond me.
Nicole LaMarco
Said this on August 6th, 2008 at 7:36pm:That is difficult. I think there are many times when the mainstream media does ban, censor or otherwise hide things that many Americans would appreciate knowing. Timing is always important. I wouldn’t be surprised.
Elaine Grant
Said this on August 6th, 2008 at 11:19pm:I don’t know…I do feel like this is one of those times where the mainstream media may be choosing the right path — it’s just too easy to repeat allegations that are unproven, and I would imagine that if a good reporter (yeah, I don’t believe the Enquirer) can’t find proof, it would be a huge mistake to run with this story. This may be a lesson to all of us on fact checking and getting primary source info.
Sarah
Said this on August 7th, 2008 at 10:21am:The media is ignoring this story because Edwards is a liberal. If a conservative, even one way less newsworthy than Edwards, screws up, we are treated to nonstop news coverage. Examples: Ted Haggard, Larry Craig, Mel Gibson, and Rush Limbaugh.
Edwards, according to many sources, was near the top of the short list to be a vice presidential nominee. None of the conservatives above involved in scandals were anywhere near that level of newsworthiness.
Monica Bhide
Said this on August 7th, 2008 at 10:42am:Here is an interesting take on the whole thing — http://beta.intent.com/blog/2008/08/05/the-john-edwards-flap#comment-136
DianaBurrell
Said this on August 7th, 2008 at 11:36am:Tiff, Edwards being out of the race is an issue some bloggers/reporters have brought up. However, he’s still a big player in this election — people were really interested to learn which candidate he’d be backing and his name is in the ring for cabinet positions — it’s not like he faded into the woodwork once he withdrew from the race.
Elaine, I do understand the reluctance to some degree. But I’m still baffled why a legitimate media outfit hasn’t come out to say, “The NE is full of crap and here’s evidence A, B, and C why.” Or at least tried to get JE to sit down for an interview to address this, because it’s not just a little rumor, but a long-running story/rumor that’s been dogging him for awhile. I think the story isn’t going to disappear, and I hate to think two weeks from now, this story blowing up in his face and taking attention away from Denver — that’s what I think the NE is waiting for.
As for the liberal/conservative thing — yes, I’d agree that the media skews liberal, but I feel that Larry Craig’s arrest was BIG news because he’s a politician who broke the law and he happens to be a longstanding opponent of homosexual rights. I’d argue that Bill Clinton still wins the award for the politician who got the most airtime for his private life — and he’s definitely not a conservative. Sex sells in this country — if you’re a conservative, the story has a little more veneer, but it really doesn’t matter what side of the fence you’re on.
Rachel
Said this on August 7th, 2008 at 6:51pm:I remember, in media law class, having my prof tell us that stories from places like the Enquirer are pretty credible. I can’t remember the exact reasoning but it was among the grounds of that if they weren’t credible, they’d constantly be having lawsuits on their hands.
I’ll give them credit– I’ve seen many a story on their magazines at checkouts that eventually ended up in the mainstream press months later.
Rachel
Said this on August 8th, 2008 at 5:20pm:Well…the news is out now!