After its relentless reporting blew the lid off the John Edwards-Rielle Hunter cheating scandal, the National Enquirer is in the running for a Pulitzer Prize.
Does it deserve to be nominated - or even win it?
Laugh if you want, but the Enquirer’s coverage of Edwards' double life is being considered for investigative reporting and national news reporting awards.
The story of his affair and love child with Rielle Hunter were ignored, dismissed, and ignored again until finally being vindicated by mainstream media.
The significance of the story, the New York Times notes, is the fact that Democratic Party came dangerously close to nominating this man for the presidency.
This would have been a disgrace of unparalleled proportions.
Yet only in the National Enquirer was the truth about John Edwards’ recklessness, and the grim reality behind his doting-husband facade, exposed.
The National Enquirer did us a favor exposing this loser.
The mainstream media's hesitation to run the story might be defended as the high ground, a means to a less sex-obsessed culture, which is somewhat noble.
But the celebrity gossip machine will grind on regardless.
If Americans aren’t reading about Edwards and Rielle Hunter, they’ll just read about Tiger Woods and Rachel Uchitel (also broken by the Enquirer, natch).
Better the former than the latter, right? Woods' apology made clear that we may be interested, but it's his business and he will talk only when he wants.
Tiger may have opened himself up to incredible scrutiny and criticism with his inappropriate actions, but to a certain point it's his problem to deal with.
Not so with John Edwards. Athletes and talk show hosts don’t work for us, but politicians' dalliances tend to interfere with, and often corrupt, their jobs.
Not all affairs produce corruption, and we don’t have to know every sin committed. But with Edwards, imagine if we found out only after it was too late?
We're just saying.
Chinese
French
German
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Russian
Spanish
