Saturday I speculated that this whole John Edwards sex scandal was planned out. Hm.
Comes today on CNN a story about how the Obama campaign emailed supporters last night saying Obama's nominee will be announced via email and texting. And CNN also is running a story about the former Clinton communications director speculating that if the MSM had done its job and exposed Edwards and his affair with Rielle Hunter, Clinton would be the presumptive nominee at this point because Edwards would have been out of the race. I'll bet those on the inside of the former Clinton machine are just kicking themselves since Friday. And think of who they used for Opp Research. Perhaps Hillary should be asking them for a refund.
And then there is this, the proverbial editorial writer who takes on a story defending the establishment media about how fair and impartial they are. How they don't care about the outcomes of races. How they don't see what a news story about a former presidential candidate having an affair where someone clearly was using large amounts of money to Sugar Daddy the mistress. No, Ruben Navarrette Jr. didn't see that as news. And while he makes the argument that world affairs were more important; the economy for example, I submit that the MSM actually did themselves more harm than good by waiting on this piece.
Newsroom managers across the country are so worried about what's going to happen to their business, they've largely gotten away from investigating stories like this. The newsroom staffs have been cut so deep, there is little time or room or money for a true investigative piece. And that's been noted here on this site before. We are at a dangerous point in the news business. Some newspapers have stopped reimbursing reporters for gas mileage. So what's the drive for them to actually leave the news room to get to the heart of a story? We're seeing the answer in it above.
CNN the other night tried to make an issue with the editor of the National Enquirer about whether or not they paid for their information. He answered that the question was neither here nor there, and he's right. At least they GOT the information. The more I've read this past weekend about the Edwards Affair, it becomes clear that more and more reporters knew about this story but either didn't or were not allowed to write about it.
We are at a dangerous place in the news business in America. Now that the story is out there, there should be stories popping up about how Rielle Hunter was financed over the past couple of years. There should be inquiries about how it was reported to the election commission in several states and to the feds at several levels. There should be questions as to who owns the property Rielle is living in. There should be questions being asked about the other campaign aide. There should be questions being asked to other campaign aides and when they might or might not have heard this information. Were there ever any focus groups conducted by the Edwards campaign about how to handle this if it came up? Did Clinton or Obama ever push poll this to test it?
It is because these questions don't get asked anymore by MSM newsrooms, that bloggers take it upon themselves to go get these answers. This can be good and it can be bad all at the same time. But where is the news business going in America?
Here is how Ruben ends his column:
"But nor is Edwards the front-page fodder he was back when the fight
for the Democratic nomination was in full swing and he had a faint
chance of winning. The fact that Edwards lied repeatedly to reporters
and his campaign paid Hunter thousands of dollars made the story a bit
more appealing. Yet it wasn't appealing enough to compete with all the
other things there are to write about in the world — including the
shaky economy, the Iraq war, Iran's nuclear buildup, Russia's invasion
of the former Soviet republic of Georgia and the Beijing Olympics.
"It's a world that is much more fascinating, and frightening, than you
might imagine if you're accustomed to getting your news in the checkout
line at the supermarket."
Ruben, people are not accustomed to getting their news from the checkout line. Rather, it's called the Internet and it is quickly putting papers like the ones that run your column out of business.