Snappy newsletters. Simple Facebook sharing. Spirited comments. Sweet features are waiting… GET THEM NOW!

Snobs Doomed Enquirer's Pulitzer Bid

Edwards exposé a shoo-in for glory—but not for tabloid

By M. Morris,  Newser Staff

Posted Apr 13, 2010 1:37 PM CDT

(Newser) – By any sane measure, the unmasking of John Edwards as a philanderer who knocked up his mistress while his wife battled cancer was one of the all-time great scoops—except in determining the winners of yesterday's Pulitzer Prizes for journalism. "The media elite circled the wagons to exclude the scrappy, self-proclaimed supermarket tabloid," Emily Miller writes for the Washington Times.

"If the New York Times or the Washington Post had broken the same stories about Mr. Edwards, the Pulitzer would have been a slam dunk," she rages. Instead, the mainstream media looked the other way as Edwards' web of lies unraveled. Still, there's a silver lining, Miller writes: "The next time the Enquirer uncovers a political scandal, the mainstream media will have no choice to pay attention—and follow up."

This Dec. 27, 2006, photo provided by the National Enquirer shows Rielle Hunter with John Edwards in the 9th Ward of New Orleans.
This Dec. 27, 2006, photo provided by the National Enquirer shows Rielle Hunter with John Edwards in the 9th Ward of New Orleans.   (AP Photo/The National Enquirer)
« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow
My TakeCLICK BELOW TO VOTE
33%
7%
7%
24%
3%
26%
To report an error on this story, notify our editors.
COMMENTS
Showing 3 of 15 comments
SkeeterVT
May 9, 2010 6:11 PM CDT
The Washington Times' Emily Miller's blast at the Pulitzer committee for excluding the National Enquirer from consideration of the Pulitzer for breaking the John Edwards sex scandal really rings hollow, considering that the newspaper she works for is on the brink of collapse after the Unification Church -- which owns the right-wing daily's parent company -- last fall cut off its $35 million annual subsidy to keep the paper alive.

Since then, the Times has fired two publishers, several top editors and a whopping 60 percent of its staff. It completely eliminated its Metro and Sports sections and stopped publishing on weekends.

The result? Its circulation, which was an anemic 67,000 in its last report to the Audit Bureau of Circulations last September, has since plunged to 42,000, according to the Washington Post, with no end in sight to the decline.

Now the Times has been put up for sale -- but who in their right mind is going to buy a newspaper that's never made a profit in its 28-year history and loses up to $80 million a year? And why should they further pad Rev. Moon's coffers?

Prediction: The Washington Times will fold by September, if not sooner.
JGirl
Apr 14, 2010 6:15 AM CDT
the enquirer isn't fit to grace the outhouse.
singalong
Apr 13, 2010 11:06 PM CDT
I'm pretty sure the first time I noticed the Enquirer was when they ran a story about pirates attacking a ship in a bottle. If they want to be taken seriously, report real news sometime, not just gossip and made up stories.
 

NEWS FROM OUR PARTNERS
Other Sites We Like:   24/7 Wall St.   |   BuzzFeed   |   Cracked   |   Timelines   |   POPSUGAR Tech   |   Business Insider   |   HuffPost Entertainment   |   NewsOne