I have a guilty pleasure. I love the National Enquirer. I don’t ever buy it for myself as it is an expensive indulgence, but I have one frequent visitor from London and one local friend who get it for me as an occasional treat. I always make sure to receive the annual “Who’s Gay?” issue and the one after the Academy Awards.
The National Enquirer is not just a pretty supermarket face: it is also the source of many political scoops, especially those laden with scandal. The company that produces the National Enquirer is now submitting for a Pulitzer Prize their relentless work in exposing John Edwards’ personal life.
These mavens of the expose were the ones who first revealed that Edwards was having an affair. They were the first to report that he fathered the child. He scoffed that anyone would take notice of a sleazy tabloid, but he clearly hadn’t done his homework. The Enquirer has blown a lot of covers in its day, according to Wikipedia. Here are some:
They published photos of O.J. Simpson wearing Bruno Magli shoes that matched the foot print found at the crime scene – although Simpson strongly denied having ever owned such items. Later, despite more denials, they broke news of his book If I Did It.
They produced some dirty details on the Clinton/Lewinsky dalliance.
In 2001, they announced that Rev. Jesse Jackson had a child with someone other than his wife.
The story of Rush Limbaugh’s attachment to pain-killers was their scoop.
It was only after they informed her that they had discovered Bristol was pregnant, that Sarah Palin announced the news to the world.
They were the first to report on Tiger Woods having an affair and have since continued to expand the exposure. In fact, just a day or two ago TheDailyBeast.com “solved” the “mystery” of what went on in Tiger’s household that dramatic Thanksgiving and it turns out the National Enquirer was at the heart of the conflict. Tiger was forced to give “Elin advance warning that the National Enquirer was about to run a story claiming that he had an affair…” Naturally Woods scorned the Enquirer and denied the veracity of their story. Only when Elin “learned some of the Enquirer’s specifics about the purported affair” could she piece together enough details to realize Woods was lying.The National Enquirer had a long history of being sued until they decided to abandon the “three-headed infant terrorizes neighborhood seeking out puppy blood” flavor of story and begin to apply a judicious amount of fact-checking. I consider them far more reliable than Faux News and far more entertaining than CNN. It is a publication full of color – both literal and figurative.
It’s true that I skip a lot of pages, including the cutest baby of the week, heroic pet and miraculous cure stories. Like all their readers, I devour the peculiar classified ads (fortune telling and lucky charms dominate), amazed that they still have them in a print publication. I almost never agree with their fashion judgments and wish they’d stop doing their part for the anorexia pandemic.
But as their scoops prove, the National Enquirer delivers. Pulitzer Prize Contender? You tell me.
definitely yes! Stories interesting, researched and EARLY. Why not?
Posted by: freetim | 27 January 2010 at 13:25
Oh Tim, I only now saw that you posted a comment. I expected to get so much more reaction - thanks especially for having my back on this one!
Posted by: Sue Katz | 28 January 2010 at 23:48
If the National Enquirer wins a Pulitzer, I am going to become illiterate. Prying through people' garbage and paying off lowly paid staff is not journalism..at least to me.
Posted by: Mia | 13 February 2010 at 18:11