National Enquirer deserves a Pulitzer
February 7th, 2010
For all the hand wringing and discussion about the need to “save” journalism’s accountability functions, there is an amazing lack of actual accountability journalism being practiced in the land.
Two recent cases of media failing to hold political power accountable illustrate the condition perfectly.
First, of course, is the sordid John Edwards affair. The National Enquirer dogged the story, breaking every bit of it, while American media large and small ignored the important story–important because Edwards was just a step away from being vice president or attorney general or holding some other high office. Why the media ignored the story is interesting, but it may be in large part because of traditional media disdain for the Enquirer and its kind of journalism.
Let me say this loudly: The Enquirer deserves a Pulitzer for its work and its public service. John Cook, writing in Gawker, makes a strong case for giving the tabloid one of journalism’s most coveted prizes. He pretty much destroys traditional media objections to such action.
Of course, it is not likely to happen for the same reasons traditional media ignored the story in the first place: they hate the Enquirer’s alternative journalism. It is certainly not the first time. The Washington Times in the early 1990s broke congressional scandal after scandal, which helped topple Democrats from power in 1994. The Washington Post ignored the story. It was so obvious that Congressional insiders–Democrat and Republican–joked the Post should refund a year’s worth of subscription payments. The reason it was ignored: traditional media did not like the “moony” ownership of the Washington Times.
Here’s the second case:
In Illinois, candidate Scott Lee Cohen won the Democratic lieutenant governor nomination with almost no media scrutiny. Lucky for him. Says Michael Miner in the Chicago Reader:
There was a delicious story to be written — steroids, hookers, assault charges all figured in Cohen’s murky pawnbroking history — and no one had written it, except the Sun-Time’s Mark Brown, months ago, and Brown admits he didn’t do it justice.
The result of that lack of media scrutiny is that voters were cheated. Panicked Democrats are calling for Cohen to pull out of the race, which he has refused to do.
Miner also notes other cases where media scrutiny of politicians was lacking.
The reason for accountability journalism is to give citizens information they can use to make decisions–decisions about politics, government and their communities. Timing is important. So while the Raleigh News and Observer has done an outstanding job exposing corruption in the Gov. Mike Easley administration, it is after the fact. What’s more important for citizens and voters: information about a politician who has left office–or a politician who is running for office?
That’s exactly why the Enquirer’s expose of the Edwards affair is so important.
And it is exactly why media organizations should hang a collective head in shame, and why the Enquirer should get the Pulitzer. Posted by Leroy Towns


