MSM Using Blogosphere as an Unpaid, Uncredited Research Dept.

Blogosphere: Doing the Research the Mainstream Press Won't Do

MSM: Trying to improve the Bottom Line?



Simon Scowl at Deceiver is upset.

He's discovered that the blogosphere, which was the only place--besides, of course, the National Enquirer--doing any digging into John Edwards' affair with Rielle Hunter and his cover up operation--is serving as the Mainstream Media's unpaid and uncredited Research Division.

Weird, huh? Deceiver was the only place talking about this stuff for at least a week and a half, and all of a sudden everybody else has been doing original research on it the whole time? Or maybe it doesn’t count as research when we do it, since we’re just a silly gossip blog with a hot-pink logo. Maybe that’s it.

Dear Serge F. Koveleski, Patrick Healy, Toby Lyles, and everybody else at the New York Times:

You know the blogs and tabloids beat you to this story. Everybody knows. It wasn’t exactly difficult, considering you guys waited almost three weeks for John Edwards to give you permission. You’re not going to salvage your reputation by pretending otherwise.

Also, somebody should talk to whoever writes your headlines. “Behind a Meeting That Exposed Edwards’s Affair”? Why not just type out an equivalent number of Z’s?

Signed,
Your uncredited researcher

Updates to story at DBKP.com: Mainstream Media Uses Blogosphere as Unpaid Research Wing in Edwards Scandal

DBKP also has been affected. A few weeks ago, the Times of London's SARAH BAXTER, inserted material from our July 23 John Edwards Affair: Interview with David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer into her Times' story--without a word about the source where she stole the material.

We wrote about the plagiarism after being alerted by blogger, Doug Ross in MSM Stealing Blog Content: Times Online Joining Growing MSM Trend?. Baxter's article (readers will have to do their own Googling--the Times gets no link here) gives the impression that she contacted National Enquirer's Editor-in-chief, David Perel and talked to him.

Our three letters to the Times remain unanswered. The Times Online still carries Baxter's story with our material, without attribution.

These two cases are not the only ones: one reader alerted DBKP yesterday that portions of a story posted on one network's website "sounded suspiciously like something you wrote about a few days ago".

We read the article and suspected a little--okay, a lot--rewriting may have occurred. But, what the hell? At least, some effort was expended by a Mainstream Media reporter furiously trying to get up to speed on a story Big Media blacked out for nine months with all the fervor of a religious zealot.

Of course, the MSM wouldn't have had to resort to these shady practices if just one of the members of their clubby community had investigated allegations surrounding John Edwards nine months ago: but that would've put a dent in the invitations to the wine-and-cheese parties.

The only investigation came from the National Enquirer and a few bloggers. But, you wouldn't know it if you watched the Big Media frenzy of this past weekend. Some stories didn't even mention the National Enquirer by name--it became an unnamed "tabloid".

John Edwards' "confession"--forced on him by the "tabloid trash" National Enquirer-- transformed the MSM from an early-July Rip Van Winkle into August 8 Woodward and Bernsteins. Don't believe that? Readers only have to stifle their gag reflex and tune in to the MSM coverage.

Readers--and writers--of the blogosphere can expect more of the same. With MSM "news" organizations cutting staff in an effort to stay afloat, stealing from the blogosphere serves as a profitable way to "cover" stories previously denied to readers.

The John Edwards scandal is only the latest battle between citizen journalists and a MSM in a death spiral. It won't be the last. Big Media has proved incredibly resistant to changing editorial policies that have driven readers and viewers to find other, less left-leaning content.

Polls show that the percentage of people who trust what the MSM writes hovers somewhere between carnival barkers and used car salesmen. More Americans believe in UFOs than believe the Mainstream Media is unbiased.

The media reaction: attack citizen journalists and hunker down behind excuses of "standards" that drove ex-customers away with the highly-selective nature those standards were applied. Oh, and practice a code of denial that would make John Edwards proud.

The Mainstream Media wants to improve their bottom line?

Clean house of editors intent on serving up the same cheesy gruel of socialist opinion masquerading as news. The public's been onto that scam for years: falling stock prices and ad revenues confirm it.

Or CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, Time, Newsweek, and the New York Times could try billing the Democrat National Committee for PR services rendered.

P.S. Welcome to the club, Simon.

by Mondoreb
image: dbkp reference file

John Edwards Affair, Leftblogosphere: No Good Time to Talk About Edwards

Let me tell you about a story I didn't want to write about back in December...

Left bloggers--who didn't want to report any of the John Edwards allegations back in December, never mind investigate them--are up in arms because John Edwards is being reported by Fox in August.

To be fair, the left side of the Blogosphere did
comment on the National Enquirer's allegations back in December: mostly, they hurled invective at those who did write about it.

Satyam, Think Progress [Fox News Host Refuses To Talk About Russia-Georgia War, Insists On Covering Edwards’ Affair, like a magician, wants readers to look at the war in his one hand while whisking away the Edwards scandal in his other.

Yesterday, Russia launched a major military offensive against Georgia, which Georgia has called “a state of war.” Nearly two thousand people have died and the conflict risks sparking a wider war. Also yesterday, former senator John Edwards admitted to having an extramarital affair in 2006.

Of course, a look back at a July 11, 2005 Think Progress post, It’s Not the Crime, It’s The Cover-Up, showed a completely different standard.

Hello, Washington Press Corps. What is the thirty year rule that has defined every White House scandal since Watergate? It is not the crime, it’s the cover-up that gets you in trouble.

What a difference three years--and party affiliation--make: TP was referring to Karl Rove and the Valerie Plame affair.

Steve Benen, Carpetbagger's Report, [War, schmar, there’s Edwards gossip to obsess over], has a headline just as strident. However, the tone of the post is more reasoned.

Media interest in John Edwards’ adultery controversy is probably inevitable. He’s not a sitting lawmaker or candidate for anything anymore, but he’s a well-known political figure caught up in a sex scandal. News outlets are going to cover this; it’s unavoidable.

My Left Wing, [Curmudgette :: Fair, Balanced, All Edwards, All the Time] posts the following--with which we heartily agree:

Now I would be the last person to say that the Edwards affair is not news. In fact, I've pretty consistently argued that it is news. But this is positively surreal.

The major media didn't breathe a word about Edwards while he was running for president. No effort was made to check out the places, dates, license numbers and other hard facts reported by the Enquirer back in December.

As has been noted countless times at DBKP, not one reporter even asked him about the Enquirer's allegations in December. Thus, Edwards--contrary to MSM reports that cite his "continuous denials" and "Edwards denied it December" angles to explain their non-coverage--did not address the issue of Rielle Hunter after November 29, 2007.

Edwards never had to address the Enquirer's allegations once they became specific in December. He could easily deny the October Enquirer story, which was general in nature at that point. The tabloid did not even name Rielle Hunter at that point--even though Hunter issued a denial then. [Why Did Rielle Hunter Denounce the National Enquirer NINE WEEKS Before the Paper Would Name Her as the “Other Woman?]

DBKP, though it has almost 80 stories on the Edwards scandal since December, didn't even write about the October Enquirer allegations. We felt there really wasn't anything to write about at that point: it fell totally in the realm of gossip--though who doesn't like gossip?

However, the December Enquirer allegations were a completely different animal. Anyone giving them a fair reading in August 2008 wonders that not one MSM reporter thought they were "curious", to say the least.

On December 23, 2007, we introduced one story with [The Edwards Scandal, The Press, The Enquirer and the Blogosphere]:

The story so far of John Edwards, his campaign and Rielle Hunter, the uncovering of hard facts by the National Enquirer, the Mainstream Media’s non-reaction, and the blogosphere’s fondness for the comfort that only sitting on one’s ass brings.

We observed then how the other half of the blogosphere operates.

DBKP has previously written about Sam Stein, a writer doing a fairly routine piece for Huffington Post about the new ways candidates were trying to reach Internet readers.

One of those new methods was something called a webisode, a short video for letting Internet users see a candidate in a more personal way. John Edwards wanted users to see “the real John Edwards”, as he says in his recently-rediscovered video.

Stein recounted his surprising adventures with seeing the Edwards video. That Stein was having a tough time running down something that should have been screaming for publicity interested him.

When he wrote about his adventures, a certain section of the blogosphere pilloried Stein and his musings on the subject. At that point, Rielle Hunter was not as well-known as she is today. Running down information on her required a little digging.

Sam Stein did that digging and was rewarded for his efforts with a mound of vitriol.

A reporter who had done actual work on a story was ridiculed by writers who had sat on their asses.

“Sam Stein and the Enquirer are nothing but lazy, no-good trashy gossips”

The Think Progress piece mentions a Fox interview with PBS’s Bonnie Erbe. Ms. Erbe is quoted as saying that the Edwards affair is “not the stuff the American public wants to hear about in this election cycle.”

Au contrair, Bonnie.

"Rielle Hunter", "John Edwards", "John Edwards affair" and "John Edwards scandal" were four of the top seven search terms on July 22 at one point. They have remained, to one degree or another, in the Top 100 Most Searched at Google since then. So, Ms. Erbe, there have been plenty of Americans searching for information on this topic. They had to: PBS joined the other MSM in not mentioning it, prior to August 8.

PBS didn't discuss it back in December; they didn't discuss it prior to July 21 either. Bonnie Erbe didn't want to discuss it today, though one would suppose that Bonnie knew the topic to be discussed when invited to appear on Fox News. Just exactly when would Erbe's PBS like to discuss this topic?

All readers who said, "never" or "seldom" get a cookie.

The same portion of the blogosphere who only wanted to discuss how vulgar those that did discuss it in December are back to their same arguments in August. Most Americans are vulgar, it must be supposed.

We agree that the zero-to-media-circus coverage now is a little much. However, a little discussion during the last eight months might have prevented the 24/7 news status the Leftblogosphere is complaining about today.

Some blogs have mostly remained silent or made a few comments and let it stand at that. That's a perfectly reasonable position to take: there is other news to discuss. But it's not reasonable to attack those who do discuss it.

That's the job of Big Media.

by Mondoreb
images: dbkp file

John Edwards Affair: Edwards Admits Affair with Rielle Hunter

In a coldly-calculated political move, John Edwards has now admitted that he had an affair, but did not father Rielle Hunter's daughter, Frances Quinn Hunter.

In an interview with ABC News Nightline admitted that he had an affair with Rielle Hunter and lied about it while campaigning for President.

In an interview for broadcast tonight on Nightline, Edwards told ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff he did have an affair with 44-year old Rielle Hunter, but said that he did not love her.

Edwards also denied he was the father of Hunter's baby girl, Frances Quinn, although the one-time Democratic Presidential candidate said he has not taken a paternity test.

Just a few days after leading Democrats called for Edwards to deny the affair or risk losing a prime speaking spot at the Democrat National Convention, Edwards did not deny the affair--something he has not done since a November 29, 2007 interview.

The political calculus is: Edwards hopes that his admission of having an affair will allow the incident to blow over, allowing him to procede with his political career.

According to ABC News, which has refused to report on the event previously, "Edwards said he knew he was not the father based on timing of the baby's birth on February 27, 2008. He said his affair ended too soon for him to have been the father."

The announcement may prove to raise more questions than it answered.

One question which immediately comes to mind: What was Edwards doing leaving the Bevrly Hilton at 2:40 in the morning, visiting a woman he says he did not love and her baby, which he says he did not father?

UPDATES to follow at DBKP.com

by Mondoreb