« Previous | Main | Next »

Foreign Media Critical of U.S. Edwards Coverage

Share

August 10, 2008 12:59 PM

ABC News’ Mike Lee reports: In London, the Observer online, which is part of The Guardian, is criticizing the mainstream American media for its handling of the John Edwards story.  The Guardian’s Paul Harris files an analysis from New York that includes the following criticisms:

-The mainstream American media did not report on the story even as it became a national talking point on the Internet and U.S. late-night television.

-During that long (pre-ABC interview) period, the scandal was covered by many foreign newspapers, leading to the bizarre situation in which many Americans were reading detailed accounts of the allegations (in the foreign media) long before their mainstream U.S. news organizations were reporting on it.

What do you think?  Should the American mainstream media have done more reporting on the Edwards rumored affair before it was confirmed?  Or do you think it is more responsible to wait until you have the story confirmed?   Where should journalism end and rumor begin?

August 10, 2008 in Clinton, Hillary | Permalink | User Comments (60)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Liberal American media fails to report the news. They're pro-Obama and pro-Edward. I don't trust NBC,MSNBC, CNN and ABC anymore except Fox news. Fox news investigated this affair two weeks ago.

Posted by: ss | Aug 10, 2008 1:55:03 PM

Foxnews has not reported on McSame's scandal with his previous wife. He has a plygamous affair marring Cindy when still married and Foxnews has said and continue not to say anything about McSame's scandalous behaviour. Fox news is a rightwing conspirator and has pushed so hard on Edward and forgot McSame.

Posted by: BKMC | Aug 10, 2008 2:04:51 PM

Yes the MSM has failed miserably and proven that it is definatley liberal biased to hide this from the public. This type of "conspiracy of silence" with the MSM is going to have alot of people questioning what else the MSM is keeping quiet about. They have now confirmed to the public that reports in the National Enquirer can be true. So people will now begin to wonder if all the rumors about Obama might be true and the MSM is just not reporting it. I am so thankful that I am not dependent on the MSM here in America for my news.

Posted by: RL | Aug 10, 2008 2:08:50 PM

Coverage of Edward's story so late made a lot of people look funny while discussing it.

They were feeling sorry for his wife Elizabeth while she had passed over it long time ago (back 2006)!

Posted by: Peace | Aug 10, 2008 2:09:51 PM

The Edwards' trashy story is GOSSIP!

It is personal and private.
It affects only the families concerned.
And they have handled it.

The mainstream media was correct to leave the personal story to the bottom feeders in the gossip media.

The mainstream media is now INCORRECT to just on the 'gossip media kill' and pretend that it is relevant to American lives in general.

Government has to trust citizens to handle PRIVATE-PERSONAL affairs without the whole nosy nation getting consumed in people's PRIVATE AFFAIRS!

The Edwards and the other 'wife' already dealt with the issue.
All Americans are doing now is to further burden Elizabeth Edwards, who is already being burdened by her cancer!

Posted by: Patriot | Aug 10, 2008 2:18:54 PM

On the other hand, a person who is running for the highest office in the land should not start out by lying! I guess the Enquirer was right! And, patriot, if as you say this was a private matter...then why was Edwards hiding in the bathroom? Why the need to lie? Just be a man and admit it! Right???

Posted by: Ed | Aug 10, 2008 2:28:25 PM

Only naive youngsters and liberal academics trust CNN, NBC, and the NY Times.

Posted by: Jane | Aug 10, 2008 2:31:07 PM

Edwards got what he deserved -- disgrace as a national leader. Just like Clinton.

Posted by: Val | Aug 10, 2008 2:33:38 PM

The question is not whether or not it needed to be reported before it was confirmed by others, but that there was smoke, ergo a potential story and the MSM failed to follow up on it and thus was scooped by the National Enquirer.

So you didn't even ask the correct question, which is "why didn't you all investigate this more thoroughly yourselves?"

The MSM can report the rumour of 'concern' by unnamed staffers about a theoretical affair by McCain and splash a story in the NYTs, but they totally blow off Edwards, where speculation has been running rampant in this area basically forever and he actually was having one. Yet no one is reporting on it.

To me, this isn't about reporting gossip, but the lack of investigation on the part of the MSM. I take it as one of those 'we really don't want to know' situations.

My next question is, are you going to follow the money and find out who was really paying off Hunter and where that money really came from? Does it take a total layperson to mention the possible violation of laws if campaign monies were used?

I think that it's hilarious that this is even being offered up as a question. The MSM can hyperbolically fantasize that McCain used Antichrist imagery in a campaign ad mocking Obama's messianic attitude and following, but Edwards somehow is off limits?

It's all ridiculous, the average person knows it, and we can't stop shaking our heads. Never ask why we look for our news from other sources. The American MSM is constantly censoring itself and we're frankly tired of it. Thank God for the interent.

Posted by: JR | Aug 10, 2008 2:38:36 PM

Why is it that some people believes that they have a right/obligation to the PRIVATE AFFAIRS of other? NOSINESS!

No one owes a NOSY public the 'truth' about one's PRIVATE LIFE!

Edwards did not 'lie' for those who did not seek to mind the Edwards' PRIVATE AFFAIRS!

Those NOSY Americans, who claim Edwards' 'lied', DESERVED to be 'lied' to. lol

Posted by: Patriot | Aug 10, 2008 2:38:46 PM

Edwards was told by the DNC to "come clean" or he would not have a place to speak at the convention! Since he has sort of confessed....does he now have something relevant to say? For that matter, do either of the Clinton's have anything relevant to add?

Posted by: Ed | Aug 10, 2008 2:39:31 PM

This is not a news story. Not only is he not the nominee, it is/was unlikely that he would be the VP pick. I can't believe that with all of the "sex scandals" on both sides of the aisle we have not gotten over this preoccupation with the sex lives of politicians. If we quit asking and making a big deal of it they would not have to lie and it is the lie most people point to (although it is really the sex they want to discuss). It seems pretty clear that people, generally men more than women but women nonetheless, cheat. For lots of reasons, all of which are none of our business. Please.... let's get on to real news.

Posted by: Sharon | Aug 10, 2008 2:53:32 PM

Media coverage in the U.S. has been inconsistent. One wonders why; is it the Corporate Board influence in the news room? Is it the newer class of journalist who place comfort above sustenance? The slippage in my view has been in a lessor demanding and risk taking generation of news room editors. TV & Cable news reporting has become an entertainment industry rather than an in-depth reports, nearly all tend to be shallow and raise more questions then providing complete information. Time is money thinking and the customer is left wanting.

Posted by: Lou R | Aug 10, 2008 2:54:02 PM

Kind of circular argument there.
Wait til the story is confirmed before reporting it.

But what exactly was the media doing TO CONFIRM it?

I think the criticism is justified. The media rarely investigates stories anymore. They sit back and wait for it to land on their laps.

That's how we ended up in a war on Iraq based on lies. The media didn't do their job and contributed.

The media, like so many politicians, are more interested in keeping their jobs and the money flowing than in doing their job. There are more lies in the Pres campaign than I can count and where is the media in reporting facts?

The media is as lazy and incompetent as our government officials.

Posted by: korey | Aug 10, 2008 2:56:19 PM

The media showed their true colors and failed to do their jobs. They remain biased and it shows in their reporting.Look how they pounced on the Senator from Idaho for tapping his foot in a bathroom but let this story lie fallow for 7 months until the world media forced them to report it. ABC means A always B be C covering your ass just like CBS means C can't B be S sure.

Posted by: jim 234 | Aug 10, 2008 3:05:20 PM


The media is definitely biased! Can't believe a word that's printed. Still, some people get their intelligence from reading such rags!

Posted by: Aston | Aug 10, 2008 3:25:28 PM

Fox would have covered this story because they are pro McCain ,but they do not mention that McCain did the very same thing and worse to his first wife.Maybe that should be fodder for the news media especially as McCain is running for president and John wasn't.McCains my friends is getting real old everyone knows he is no ones friend unless they have money or power or can help him in his quest for the whitehouse.I believe I read he ran twice and lost during the primaries,what does that make him???

Posted by: jojobo1 | Aug 10, 2008 3:28:40 PM

The US Media is a joke. There are so many more stories being covered up. Like why is the purported Barack Obama birth certificate posted on DailyKos just a shoddy photoshop job? Why doesn't the campaign release his real birth certificate? Why won't the US Media investigate?

ABC is the only one left with a modicum of integrity. But they are slow to jump too.

Posted by: mememe | Aug 10, 2008 3:29:44 PM

No they did not do their jobs. Media better redeam its self and do their homework on barack before its too late.

Posted by: rachel | Aug 10, 2008 3:29:59 PM

FOX NEWS IS FAKE FRAUD AND TWISTED!!!!

Posted by: angie | Aug 10, 2008 3:47:16 PM

Post a comment