Posted on 04/23/2024 10:20:26 AM PDT by thegagline
“MSNBC ‘said yesterday there was no criminal evidence presented yet, and it’ is a weak case.”
Take out the words said through it and you have their whole intelligence covered.
wy69
“MSNBC ‘said yesterday there was no criminal evidence presented yet, and it’ is a weak case.”
Take out the words said through it and you have their whole intelligence covered.
wy69
The National Enquirer has never held themselves to the same standards as other newspapers. ‘Journalistic ethics’ aren’t laws and they’re not required. They’re optional. And the Enquirer chose not to follow them at will.
The Enquirer pays for stories. They pay sources to speak. They have no problem with sources that don’t want to ‘go on the record’. And they’ve been known to make up quotes - among other flaws.
So the business of possibly ‘helping’ celebrities in exchange for access etc is totally believable. They often had excellent editors who knew better - but these people could be chosen from real newspaper editors who had made a ‘mistake’ and had tarnished reputations. The Enquirer would hire them at two or three times their normal salary but it was a one way trip. Once an editor had worked for them they could never go back to a real newspaper. It was a career kiss of death.
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.