"Readers of the popular if trashy weekly — perhaps some who only glance at the headlines at the checkout counter — joined the political enemies of the handsome Democrat in asking why other news media were not carrying the story."
Posted on 08/08/2008 7:57:28 PM PDT by jerod
AP's approach: 'Better to get it right even if we couldn't get it first'
WASHINGTON - Reporters don't like being beaten on a major political story, especially by a supermarket tabloid. And being beaten up over not reporting one is even less appealing.
But a sexual affair can have just two people who know the truth. Without witnesses, documents, photographs or some form of irrefutable evidence pointing to the truth, news organizations will not endanger their own integrity.
That made it difficult to prove — and to print — the rumors that John Edwards had cheated on his seriously ill wife while running for president. Reporters were left to poke around the edges of a potentially career-ending scandal in search of an opening.
"It's not like they didn't know it was there," said Mark Feldstein, a former investigative reporter who teaches journalism at George Washington University.
"Proof is the biggest issue," Feldstein said. "The National Enquirer is not well-regarded as a news source by the news media."....
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
That they did, and that's how they think, just ask Dan Rather!
Nice camouflage Associated Propagandists. ROFLMAO! Their and your integrity as already been established. LOL!
Nice camouflage Associated Propagandists. ROFLMAO! Their and your integrity as already been established. LOL!
This might answer “who” and “why”:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2058861/posts?page=28#28
this is CYA BS because the internet had the story sliced and diced FOR TWO WEEKS AT LEAST.
This is reporters trying to save their jobs and cover their incompetence.
If Edwards were a Republican, the mistress would have already been interviewed on the Today show...perhaps the baby too...
‘Better to get it right even if we couldn’t get it first’
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!
This AP, Right??
OBVIOUSLY that rule only applies to DEMOCRATS, because that certainly hasn’t been the case with REPUBLICANS....
I’d like to see a poll of nothing but Democrats, asking if they believed the media didn’t report this story only because it was too difficult to prove.
Just to get a base number of how many Americans I can write off automatically astotally clueless and beyond hope.
Bullcrap. Republican Senator Larry Craig.
The real story is that they didn’t want to investigate it. They didn’t want to have to deal with it. They didn’t want to take down a prominent, beautiful democrat woman.
Richard Jewell
The Duke Lacross “rapists”
The National Guard memos (AP was the news agency that forced CBS’ hand, CBS almost lost their “scoop”)
McCain’s “affair”
I call BULLSTALIN.
“Right... and if Edwards were a Republican they would’ve printed it immediately.”
Of course they would’ve, in a heartbeat!!! Interesting also that the Enquirer is becoming a leader in breaking real stories, for at least the second time recently. Although the “news media” disparages them - with all the past mega-lawsuits they’ve had, I think they’re (now) actually more responsible and trustworthy than most of the MSM when it comes to facts. I saw an interview earlier with one of their spokesmen who said they’d been researching the Edwards story for many, many months. None of the other networks had the cajones to barely mention it, much less follow up.
What about “the seriousness of the charge”?
HAHAHAHA! What a load of B.S. It's never stopped MSM before.
What's worse, despite witness, doccuments, photographs and other irrefutable evidence pointing to a truth, MSM WILL NOT PRINT a story that harms their political position.
AP’s approach: ‘Better to get it right even if we couldn’t get it first’
Oh really, is that why Dan Rather couldn’t wait to publish a memo without verifying its authenticity?
That WOULD be an informative poll.
How come they never do polls like that? Oh well. *sigh*
I think that poll, if done, would reveal that only a minority believe it, which is part of the reason I think Democrats are going to elect McCain.
The only thing really interesting will be to see if Hillary switches parties back to the party of her youth (Republican, IIRC) in order to run as McCain's VP. I wouldn't put it past the brazen critter, and wouldn't put it past her getting away with it, the way the political constellations are now. Anything can happen, yipes.
Then it would be really interesting to see who Republicans would vote for.
Corrected portion in bold.
The transparency of these mediots is truly astounding. They must really get a rush when they throw their credibility in the crapper on a daily basis.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.