This past Sunday, Ted Vaden, the Raleigh News & Observer’s public editor pitched readers the N&O’s explanation for why it had never published anything about the John Edwards-Rielle Hunter affair until just days before; and then only a few details buried in the "B" section.
Vaden didn’t remind readers the former Senator, Presidential-nominee candidate and self-described “poverty fighter” has been an N&O favorite since he entered public life.
Vaden said nothing about the N&O’s 1998 endorsement of Edwards during his only Senate race; or the N&O's 2004 endorsement when Edwards ran for Vice-president with Sen. John Kerry.
And Vaden never explained why the Dems at McClatchy’s N&O reported nothing last year about Edwards’ affair with Hunter and her pregnancy, even when Edwards and Hunter both publicly denied the affair and another man in the N&O’s circulation area, Andrew Young (not the former UN Amb.) stepped forward to say he was the daddy.
Wouldn't you think the N&O, which John Edwards calls "my hometown newspaper," would view Edwards as a "credible source of news?"
But this past Sunday public editor Vaden told N&O readers:
The N&O approached the story cautiously. On Wednesday, John Drescher, executive editor, told me that N&O reporters were investigating the allegations but that the paper would not publish a story about the tabloid report. "I don't view the National Enquirer as a credible source of news," he said.There you go.
That’s what readers and advertisers pay the N&O to do, right?
"Filtering the news" is what former N&O executive editor for news Melanie Sill called it.
By the way, does anyone know why the N&O thought Crystal Mangum was such a "credible source of news?"
Vaden's entire column's here.