Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Politics | 07/24/2008 1:15 pm

Why Is the Mainstream Media Keeping John Edwards's Alleged Love Affair a Secret?

By The Staff at wowOwow.com
John Edwards
© AP
Over the past 24 hours, Internet news sites have been reporting on this week’s explosive National Enquirer story exposing a supposed John Edwards tryst in a Hollywood hotel.

However, with the exception of the Los Angeles Times, a blog from The Washington Post online and cable TV’s Headline News’s Glenn Beck, few of the mainstream media outlets are touching this story.

One Internet outlet, Slate Magazine is also asking the question, poking fun at the media for not covering it and making a direct comparison to the mainstream media frenzy around Senator Larry Craig’s bathroom antics of a couple of months ago. Slate writes:

"So why hasn’t the press commented on the story yet? Is it because it broke too late yesterday afternoon, and news organizations want to investigate it for themselves before writing about it? Or are they observing a double standard that says homo-hypocrisy is indefensible but that hetero-hypocrisy deserves an automatic bye?"

The Huffington Post thinks that Edwards just isn’t prominent enough of a figure anymore for the public to care:

"It sure looks like Edwards is a hypocrite who misrepresented himself by showcasing his wife and kids so prominently in the campaign. But his campaign was unsuccessful. Voters didn’t buy his arguments or his life story as reasons to elect him. In short, nobody cares about this now, except as celebrity gossip. And that’s how it’s going to play when the media picks it up, as it probably will.

"The better question is, should the media have gone after this story more aggressively back during the campaign? Sounds like the answer is yes."

Tell us: Do you feel cheated by the mainstream media for keeping the alleged John Edwards affair a secret?

194 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Lauriate Roly
Oh boy - am I disgusted. I was happy and content disliking the guy because of how he seemed to be, to me, during the election rumble. But this is too much. What a mess. You just can’t be happy and content disliking people nowadays - you have to hate them.
By Lauriate Roly on 07/24/2008 9:20 pm
Alessan O
This story was reported months ago, as to whether the child is John Edward’s child is still another story., Is he still having a long distrance affair with this women now, obviously the Enquirer thinks so. Whoever is behind this reporting whether the mainstream media picks up on the story or not wants John Edwards out of the government period. The story was first reported right before Iowa caucuses, he was first in the polls, came in second in Iowa. He’s on a short list for VP, now, so I guess they want the vetting to include the possible affair and child, so Obama doesn’t pick him. Yes, Clinton was outted by Jennifer Flowers before his nomination, that went over like a lead balloon, when Hillary Clinton stood by him. Was he a cheat as we all know he was, and probably still is. He did his job and his time in the Whitehouse was eight of the best years for the American people. Although they still held his feet to the fire and impreachment progress was started and the republicans wasted America’s time while European laughed aloud at he silliness of the whole thing. Should men be faithful to their wives, yes, but since when have they all been, politician or movie star., His wife and children are the ones that suffer in the end, whether the story is true or not. Elizabeth knows about the story and has evidently decided to stand by her man, and I still maintain, John Edwards was the best candidate for President running, not Obama. Right now John Edwards is a private citizen trying to help in a good campaign cause “Half n Ten” and everyone here who cares about the poor should get involved. What the Enquirer reports has nothing to do with the people of this country’s lives.
By Alessan O on 07/25/2008 12:00 am
Debbie Lesley
At some point, Americans must realize that a politician/leader of a country is not made up by morality and/or religion. If we go back through our early history and imagine founding fathers such as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson going through today’s scrutiny, where would our country be? We need to look at a person and how s/he can lead our town/state/country and not necessarily how they lead a personal life. I no longer am surprised by any news regarding a well-known person’s personal life. My gosh, don’t you know prominent (or not so prominent) people in your own community who do the same things for which we criticize well-known persons? What is the quote about casting the first stone……?
By Debbie Lesley on 07/25/2008 1:50 pm
Chrome Toe
Awww man…. I hope this isn’t true cuz it means I’m a crappy judge of character! I always just had this “feeling” that Edwards was a man of integrity. And I liked his politics. I was a big Edwards fan and supporter of his for the nomination. unfortunately i’d be more shocked at my complete lack of judgement than I would at his complete lack of judgement or integrity. It just seems par for the course when it comes to politicians. And yes i think mainstream media is cutting him slack for some reason.. if it’s true. sure he isn’t the biggest story anymore. but with ninety million cable stations, ninety bzillion news websites… they have to fill it with something and this is somewhat tittilating. so what gives?
By Chrome Toe on 07/25/2008 11:23 pm
Mugsy Peabody
Excuse me, excuse me. When in bloody hell did the National Inquirer become a trusted news source? This is, politely, a lot of slimey bs. Mr. Edwards’ private life is not our business, and we have very real business to attend. Mrs. Edwards can deal with her husband, and if she requires our help, I’m quite sure she’s capable of asking for it.
By Mugsy Peabody on 07/26/2008 12:48 am
Maggi D
Mugsy - at last some common sense!
By Maggi D on 07/26/2008 3:54 am
Dona Howlett
I think for any paper……….rag or legitimate to run a story like this without having absolute proof is damaging not only to Edwards and his family but to us the American people. I’ve always admired the Edwards family and hope the rumor is not true. True or not…………damage is done. I think the public should stay out of people’s bedrooms. It’s none of our business. If this were a reason to destroy a persons political career some of our Founding Fathers would never have helped to create this wonderful Country of ours.
By Dona Howlett on 07/26/2008 1:09 pm
LuckyLady n/a
Thoughts: What is a competent news source these days. The BBC is low key but I doubt that they would bother with Edwards. There are many great attorneys (I have known and worked for some), However the moment the ABA approved advertising for attorneys it was downhill all the way. The advertising appeals to the uneducated who think that Larry H. Parker or whoever is going to represent them personally, that they will get a 6 million dollar settlement for “almost” being damaged, that they will not have to pay for a thing other than costs. Please, people, use Shepherds and find out your prospective attorney’s background, his rating in his community, his rating by other attorneys, his specialty and most of all the law school which he attended and his placement in his class. Don’t sit around and complain if you don’t do your homework. The advertising for Bail Bondsmen is almost as bad. As for the National Enquirer my husband’s aunt used to read the thing in the Beauty Salon and assumed everything in it was accurate because she “read it in the paper”.
By LuckyLady n/a on 07/26/2008 3:41 pm
Jaye Ramsey Sutter
Cheated? What an odd word. I think male editors have really got to get a new angle on this—we aren’t talking Eliot Spitzer and “stand by your man,” are we? Elizabeth is ill. Couldn’t he have waited? In the middle of a presidential campaign? She knew. She had to have known. What a mediocre person. The mainstream media? What does that mean anymore? This will be on everyone’s lips during the convention. It will overshadow the whole silly staged affair. Idiotic protestors protesting the party isn’t liberal enough while it is so liberal as to have one of its candidates who should be speaking about poverty talking about the poverty of his character screwing around on his cancer ravaged, dead child grieving wife while he has a baby with a healthier, physically healthier woman. What an ego maniac. How can he be taken seriously? She may be gravely ill and dying in public while he seeks immortality in the arms of a woman of less substance and a little baby no less. Poor Elizabeth. She is a class act and the compelling politician. Him? He is so perfectly average.
By Jaye Ramsey Sutter on 07/27/2008 12:06 am
Mugsy Peabody
Jaye, you have absolutely no way of knowing whether or not this is true, and yet you have gone on and on judging him and making up opinions about him. The National Inquirer is not a primary source. This website is not a primary source. They aren’t even reliable secondary sources. This is gossip. Whether or not it is true is not our business, and yet you have judged two people you do not know and whose business is not yours. Why?
By Mugsy Peabody on 07/27/2008 3:25 am
georgia fatwood
Another Five Star Observation, Mugsy! Thank you… This whole site makes me wonder what our mothers and grandmothers would say…about many of the topics….I can just “hear” my grannies on this thread: G. One: “Tempest in a teapot.” G. Two: (compassionate heavy sigh), “Oh, darlin’, such a TIRED old sin”…..
By georgia fatwood on 07/27/2008 12:56 pm
Elizabeth Bennett
Jaye, we are smack in the middle of swift-boating season. John Edwards is traveling the country trying to get people to sign on to his plan to cut poverty in half in ten years. Naturally, it was time for people to start making up lies about him. We can’t have a reduction in poverty! Someone might have to sell one of their yachts! So Mugsy is right. There is no evidence for this kind of garbage. NE does make things up and regularly gets sued for libel. Read the wikipedia entry on the National Enquirer and you will see. How would you like it if people lied about your fidelity and character in print?
By Elizabeth Bennett on 07/27/2008 8:06 pm
Frank Peterson
Exactly Elizabeth.
By Frank Peterson on 07/27/2008 8:17 pm
G T
Just to point out an obvious thing. WoW titles itself to be about politics and GOSSIP…Wouldn’t you say that at this point in time, the “item” about John Edwards would qualify as gossip? Possible scandal? Why be upset with Wow when this site is just doing what it said it intended to do. In time, when others besides the National Enquirer have had time to verify the story, the mainstream press will report it and the focus will change from gossip to politics.
By G T on 07/27/2008 10:08 am
Mugsy Peabody
And still none of our damn business. While we don’t talk about what is our business, the way the Bushes have screwed the entire world.
By Mugsy Peabody on 07/27/2008 3:11 pm