All the Scandalous News That's Fit to Print

Politicians lie. The National Enquirer pays for information. The mainstream media is falling out of touch with America.

We hold these truths to be self evident.

And yet when all three of these variables collided in the perfect nexus of the John Edwards cheating affair, the resulting public shock and outcry was so great you would have thought Obama had chosen Britney as his running mate.

After the Enquirer's reports that Edwards had an extramarital affair were finally confirmed by his TV mea culpa, the gnashing of teeth from mainstream journalists was so loud you could barely hear the sobs of everyone who posts for the Daily Kos.

Journalists' reactions ranged from Elitist Defiant ("we were still right not to cover the story because it came from the National Enquirer") to self-flagellation ("we should pursue tips from anywhere") Overall, mainstream journalists engaged in more superficial self-examination than a young Alexander Portnoy (although with far less entertainment value).

Certainly, Edwards, like Portnoy, let his zipper become the center of his universe proving (again) that while truth is stranger than fiction our leading politicians have less depth than most fictional characters. But Edwards did more than torpedo his political career and image; he unwittingly unzipped a new era of how the press will cover scandal and where Americans obtain news.

The National Enquirer has been the brand name for scandal for decades, but ever since Al Gore invented the internet (sorry, I can never resist that one) it has been inevitable that the delivery of information would become faster than you can say, "I did not have sex with that woman."

While daily newspapers have struggled to join the digital age and race to put content online, they are still approaching the revolution with antediluvian views that a story isn't news until they say its news. Nothing illustrates this more than the Edwards' scandal.

For months the blogosphere was filled with rumors about Edwards and Rielle Hunter. The low hum of innuendo and suspicion exploded into a roar when the Enquirer published its account of the affair in December, 2007, naming Hunter and printing photographs of her six months pregnant. The Enquirer's report was carried in print and supplemented online.

Slate's Mickey Kaus was relentless in his pursuit of answers, and The Huffington Post -- one of the first to raise questions about Edwards -- stayed with the story even after Edwards gave his now infamous "It's lies, tabloid trash" caught-on-video denial. Daily papers and the TV networks were silent.

So Edwards, the presidential candidate and quintessential family man, continued his campaign and indeed there were two Americas; one where the self-designated mainstream media ignored a scandal that already had been documented in the Enquirer's published account, and the other America where new media asked questions relentlessly about why Rielle Hunter's never-seen "webisodes" for the Edwards campaign and why she was being taken care of by his close friend and hidden in a gated community while six months pregnant.

It wasn't until seven months later when the Enquirer caught Edwards visiting Hunter at the Beverly Hilton Hotel and sneaking out at 2:40 a.m. that mainstream media started to awake. And even then, The Washington Post, New York Times, LA Times and other top newspapers devoted little or no resources to the story. Mickey Kaus begged me to release the photographs of Edwards at the hotel, assuring me the mainstream media would then rush to cover the story. I disagreed and the Enquirer held back most of the photos, waiting for Edwards to deny he was there before showing the images.

Days passed with no TV broadcasts or daily newspaper articles about the scandal, but the blogosphere was blazing with hundreds of reports about Edwards' late-night visit with his mistress and baby and for the first time, the average person was aware of a story that had received no "mainstream media" attention but was thriving on the Web. That simple fact is the true watershed moment of the Edwards affair; it is the bright line demarcating the point when mainstream media's relevancy developed irreparable (and most likely fatal) cracks, when an army of bloggers overran the stodgy elitist guard with the same type of scandal that once turned newspapers and their immortalized Yellow Kids correspondents into daily habits.

When Edwards finally admitted the affair in a faux sincere TV interview, some members of the mainstream media publicly assessed their decisions to not cover the scandal. Forced to acknowledge being beaten by the Enquirer, they referenced the publication specifically, and the blogosphere obliquely, with great asperity.

A newspaper in Indiana wrote: "The story of (Edwards') tryst was reported only by the National Enquirer, a tabloid that gives supermarkets a bad name."

The Los Angeles Times justified its lack of coverage (and ban of bloggers writing about it!) with this quote from one of its editors: "The National Enquirer is a supermarket tabloid that is accurate some of the time and inaccurate some of the time."

Canada's Globe and Mail, raising the level of discourse, claimed it was "icky" that the Enquirer had broken the story. (How do we respond to that? We're rubber, you're glue...)

Meanwhile the New York Times was rebuked by its own ombudsman who strongly concluded the paper blew it by not putting enough effort into reporting the story. Yet, Bill Keller, the Paper of Record's editor, was defiant and still approached the situation with a great sense of ennui, defending his inaction by saying the "hold-your-nose quality about The Enquirer" contributed to the lack of interest by The Times. Others simply relied on standard Elvis-UFO-Aliens-Bigfoot jokes to dismiss the Enquirer's success in light of their failure.

The voice of reason in these matters usually belongs to the Washington Post's media critic Howard Kurtz. His comments encompassed both the Enquirer and the blogosphere as he wrote: "The fact that big newspapers, magazines and networks have standards -- that is, they refuse to print every stray rumor just because it's "out there" -- is one of their strengths. But in the latter stages of this case, it made them look clueless."

Sorry Howard, but those standards are now being determined in cyberspace and any attempt to disparage the populist medium increasingly sounds like a death rattle echoing throughout the pared-down newsrooms of corporate journalism. And while the watershed moment of the shifting balance of media power will prove to be one of the most important byproducts of the Edwards affair it is not my favorite moment.

That distinction is centered on an event from just a few days ago, an event with no connection to Edwards. When two Georgia men claimed to have found Bigfoot and held a press conference to display the remains, the event was ignored by the Enquirer. Bill Keller's New York Times ran a straight-faced account, complete with photograph, in the A section.

All the news that's fit to print? Clueless indeed.

David Perel is the Editor in Chief of the National Enquirer.

Comments

[larry278]

The NATIONAL ENQUIRER's John Edwards story is indeed a watershed moment in media, as a golden shower is a watershed moment.

[mscriblerus]

I remember all the media equivocating after we found nothing that we were supposed to find in Iraq. They haven't changed their approach at all. They are reporting the news as they see fit and I don't think they really buy the rhetoric they advance about performing a service to the people. I agree. It's all about $$$ and pandering.

[RedSt8r]

Revealing to Americans when candidates for offices of influence betray the public trust is the main reason to have a free press.

It is news to no one that the new media is bearing down like a cataclysmic asteroid on the dinosaur MSM.

The outing of the Edwards is the fruition of good basic journalism. Something that hardly exists, now.

Thanks for looking out for us, Mr. Perel.

[demfriend]

We have a war going onw which MSM prints or tells a story about occasionally and in this war not paid attention to much we have soldeirs who die are severely injured or they just commit suicide but hey there's other stuff to write/report on right? We have the Olympics which is supposed to promote national pride or some such and you can watch it on the computer even ain't that great? Oh and yeah that presidential campaign going on, we have trauma and drama daily just like the soaps without anyone reporting on the sex part. Then the trash rag hits with John Edwards lying to us! Holy bejesis HE LIED TO us about having sex with that woman!!!!! We are well past a time when John Edwards shoud matter much to us because he lost a while back and isn't even in any office to be tossed from! BUT, I say BUTTTT John McCain, the other John here has lied practically daily and has told some whoppers which are needing attention but he's getting little if any. John McCain tried to start some kind of conflict as in war with Russia and no one appears to care. Oh and if sex is your thing Mac is adulterer in chief already you just gotta look at the first marriage to see him as that. But who cares MSM says! John Edwards lied and had sex witht hat woman!!!!

[cmdrgmh]

This whole story is not worth the Real Media's Time.

[RedSt8r]

That's why nobody pays any attention to them and they're all going bankrupt.

[RoloTomassi]

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH...put a sock in it, you sleaze-monger.

[rudyinbama]

This is what blogs are for? Obsessing about the sex life of someone who is NOT his party's nominee?
Meanwhile, Mc Cain's numbers rise as you guys - including HuffPo - have fun trashing a democrat.
I hope you are all very proud of yourself.

[dooleynoted]

I forgot to add this tidbit from this laughable screed: "The voice of reason in these matters usually belongs to the Washington Post's media critic Howard Kurtz." Howard Kurtz, that right wing talking point tool is a voice of reason? Hehehehhe. For the true scoop on Kurtz read any number of Glenn Greenwald's posts about the media. What a joke this guys is.

[pbfishtaco]

Does the mainstream media fit tabloid journalism and investigative journalism conveniently in the same niche? Is that coincedence, or just a "budgetary" problem.

I think it solves three problems at once. It keeps editor's jobs safe, saves money, and doesn't ruffle advertiser's feathers in one fell swoop.

That's why there are many, many untold stories about the foibles and failures of this administration. Prepare to have them swept under the rug, unless they can figure out a way to make money and not implicate their parent companies and political lap dogs.

[dooleynoted]

CLUELESS indeed. Despite his self-important , hipper-than-thou tone, this blogger, poster (whatever he's supposed to be is a bigger idiot than anybody in the media. "couldn't resist the Gore invented the Internet" zinger. Hey clueless, if you bothered to do a little homework you might find out that that myth is just that - a myth propagated by the right and some simpletons like yourself in the media. So no credibility right off the bat for someone who pretends to be a prescient critic of the MSM - like most self-impressed blogger here who rip the media when they themselves don't pass the smell test, or who don't see the irony of riping news organizations when most web sites are getting their current news from ... those same news organizations.

[prettychicago]

I partially agree. But more often than not, the MSM is pulling it's info from this site, Perez and OK. Every death reported, all scandals, etc. It's quite interesting how it's turning.

I just read and enjoy. And I am a news junkie - give me more!

[presto]

I believe the poster was making a little joke about tabloid rumors. You seem a bit too tightly wound.

[Bulbul]

ewe she is not that good looking, looks mean.

[bluesteel]

We clearly need to see if any former candidates for vice president and/or primary candidates for president have ever cheated on their wives. Or told any lies. If this is not done, it simply proves how irrelevant the media has become. Or something.

[bascombe]

yawn...

[BigLib]

The MSM had no problem salivating over themselves printing lies about McCain and an imaginary mistress, but chose to ignore the Edwards scandal.

What aren't they telling us about Barry? What October surprise will derail his candidacy only because the MSM is in the tank for The One.

[NABNYC]

This is a peak sleaze moment. Yes, Edwards had sex with someone not his wife. Yawn. He was wrong. And he was stupid. End of story.

This is the peak sleaze moment in U.S. journalism because it represents the triumph of Murdoch, whose goal has been to drive serious news out of business, buy up their lifeless corpses and turn their shells into rags, create in the public a sick vouyeristic masturbatory focus on other people's sex lives, divert the public from the fact that their rights have been taken away and their nation is being destroyed, and be in a position to restrict what information the public receives forever. A lot like the dictators do in other police states. And exactly who paid that woman to hand Edwards the baby so they could get the money shot? What story did she tell him to entice him to "stop by" just for a minute? This whole thing is disgusting.

This is just sleaze all around. I'm sorry to see it's still getting any play.

[RedSt8r]

Seems like your rights are doing just fine.

You obviously grossly underestimate the level of discomfort associated with life in a true police state.

[NABNYC]

I think you should ask Abner Louillma, not me, what it means to live in a police state. He got the NYPD special, beaten, held down, raped with a wooden broom by a gang of cops in the police station.

What is a police state if not a government that ignores all laws, steals elections, steals the treasury, pardons their friends the criminals, ignores subpoenas, starts wars to steal resources, sells out the democracy for bribes, does exactly what it wants, and uses the police to intimidate, spy on, harass, put on "no fly" lists, sometimes kidnap, torture, and murder people they consider to be enemies of the government.

People have this unfortunate attitude that if they get to continue living in their suburban neighborhoods, driving their big cars and eating pizza, everything's cool. But it's the constitution, the law of the land, that's being ground up by these people. When it's all gone, then many of your neighbors may well be dragged away and "disappeared" without any legal protections. And no, I don't exaggerate.