Media Continue to Make Excuses for Ignoring Edwards Affair

After refusing the report on the affair of John Edwards, the elite media are continuing to embarrass themselves in their rationalizations for why they failed the public. Here's Michael Oreskes, theAssociated Press's managing editor for U.S. news:

"The standard of proof for confirming and publishing information on this kind of private, intimate behavior is and should be very high. I have not the slightest regret for sticking to those high standards. Getting it first is great. Getting it right is essential," he said in an email to Editor and Publisher.

The AP has even issued a news story defending itself, essentially saying it was too hard for the multimillion-dollar organization to work the story:

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. [...]

And it never was confirmed to the AP's satisfaction or, apparently, to the satisfaction of others until Edwards himself owned up to the infidelity in an interview with ABC News.

"We began pursuing the story soon after it first appeared. But the standard for proof in this kind of intimate behavior is and should be very high," said Michael Oreskes, AP's managing editor for U.S. news. "Better to get it right even if we couldn't get it first." [...]

Efforts had failed to find someone who could reveal the facts or to uncover a document linking Edwards to 42-year-old Rielle Hunter. No father is listed on the birth certificate, which the AP and other news organizations had obtained, and other evidence such as Edwards' political action committee paying her $100,000 for videos was only circumstantial.

That left little for reporters. The AP had been among those reporting in October 2007 that Edwards flatly stated that the Enquirer's initial story was false - a lie, he now admits. Still, the opening allowed news organizations to report what they otherwise stayed away from.

The process repeated itself a few weeks ago when the Enquirer reported that Edwards had paid a late-night visit to Hunter and her child. He called the allegation "tabloid trash" when a reporter asked about it on July 23 - not exactly a lie but certainly a description designed to deceive. Again, most news organization were loath to pick up the new Enquirer report, beyond the denial, and those who could have revealed the truth remained silent.

Full story here. For yesterday's embarrassment, see Jacob Lybbert's post.