Media Continue to Make Excuses for Ignoring Edwards Affair

Photo of Matthew Sheffield.
  • Bookmark and Share

John Edwards media coverageAfter 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:

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

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.

—Matthew Sheffield is the creator of NewsBusters and its Executive Editor.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

LAT Boasts About Covering Edwards Scandal

Meanwhile the L.A. Times has the gall to boast about their "coverage" of the Edwards scandal:

Several newspapers, including the Los Angeles Times, had been pursuing the story prior to Friday. But the sudden burst of attention after he confirmed a romantic relationship with Rielle Hunter, who produced video documentaries for his campaign website, was in marked contrast to the way those news organizations had tiptoed around the original reports.

 

The only tabloid trash is

The only tabloid trash is the AP and all the mainstream media that have kept this quiet while they have been snugly in bed with Edwards for over a year...instead of doing the digging they should of done themselves as we all know they would of if it was anybody in the opposite party running for President.

...anybody with a 'D' is protected, the majority of the people know it to...they see the bias, the news media of all venues are losing what little respect or value they had left to begin with.

Btw...I love the caption.

"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh

What bugs me is, at

What bugs me is, at theBeverly Hilton, why didn't the National Enquirer reporters (while they were chasing Edwards the way Edwards himself would chase down an ambulance) have any cameras on them?  The pictures of pretty boy with his figurative pants down would have made excellent pictures. (Not to mention caption contests) The left wing media although would still ignore the story they would have had their panties in a twist at that point .  

So what the AP is really

So what the AP is really saying: We are only stenographers, we parrot only that which drops in our laps and conforms to our agenda.  Interesting standard of journalism - mediocrity, is that where the term media comes from???  And they wonder why the public goes to the internet to read blogs?  So from the horses mouth, if you really want to know what's going on, you can't depend upon the AP to report it, thanks for the confirmation Mr. Oreskes.

 Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.  

The only difference between

The only difference between the AP and a bucket of monkey crap is the bucket.

LMAO, mattm!  So true.  So

LMAO, mattm!  So true.  So true.

There are excuses for everything...

There are excuses for everthing imaginable. Since when has the AP been concerned about the truth as long as the story fits its world-view? Read some of their stories about Israel if you have any doubts. I can't remember when they required "witnesses, documents, photographs( unless doctored), or some form of irrefutable evidence pointing to the truth..." Then they speak of "endangering their own integrity." As Mark Davis says, "this is a steaming shovelful."

You just don't understand.

It is complicated for the MSM to report a story like this.  First of all, this is a Democrat.  Not just any Democrat, but one that was a presidential nominee and was on a list of potential vice-presidential nominees.  This is an election year, and as a proud member of the Media Wing of the Democratic Party, there's a special responsiblity when reporting the "news" and that is do no harm to fellow Democrats.

The level of proof, necessary to reach that threshold is really, really high.  It's so much easier if the exact same circumstances involved a Republican since there is no protection involved and, if you get it completely wrong you can just deny it, since your colleagues are never going to check anyway.

Democrats: Stuck on Stupid since 2000.

Yes, the high standards of

Yes, the high standards of the liberal media have just brought us this story from the San Francisco Chronical titled:

"Georgia war is a neocon election ploy"

 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/13/EDCD129NI4.DTL

The paranoia and delusions from the left in this country is disturbing.