Will CNN report on the John Edwards/mistress/baby rumors?

Apparently we're not the only ones who wrestle with defining legitimate news sources! Seems the Wikipedia boards have been burning with this topic as well: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/07/28/wikipedia-disallows-any-mention-alleged-john-edwards-scandal

I think alot of it has to do with the political slant of the news source and that of the subject. I'm sure we all remember the front page story the N.Y.Times ran concerning McCaine's "affair."

True or not...I doubt we'll hear about this in the Times or on CNN.

jenni> by naming CNN as the source, are you meaning any show on the network can mention this story? Or, am I correct when thinking that you mean that it must be on their website?

Regardless of the slant of a news organiztion, I would hope if it's reported as true news theyre would be facts to back it up. Wouldn't you?

rborg77> Yes, I would certainly look for facts...such as an interview with a witness. Perhaps the security gaurd that was on duty at the time.

I was surprised this question settled as "Yes" (even though the story was "true").

<http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_Any_of_These_Top25_US_Newspapers_Print_a_Story_Before_the_November_2008_Election__that_Quotes_John_McCains_Joke_About_Chelsea_Clinton_3587/view>

Did someone mention :security guard" ???

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,391426,00.html

Too bad it's CNN and not a "major news source".

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,391426,00.html
http://www.newsmax.com/hirsen/John_Edwards_Blackout/2008/07/28/116891.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4406814.ece

frank> that's so true...and the only reason my $$ is on "No."

The interesting about the security guard report is that he didn't even know it was John Edwards. After the fact, someone showed him a picture and said "is this him?" Many other people are pointing out that no one has yet to post any pictures of the kerfuffle, despite there reportedly being two Enquirer photographers there.

I think there's a definite possibility that this is all smoke and no fire, but I am curious to know what the level of noise has to be before they will at least admit to having heard the rumors.

BTW if you click on 'more background' I included the fact that FOX has been reporting on this topic. (I HATE that you have to click on that to see all of the background)

Another link I found interesting (but that wouldn't fit in the background): http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/07/la-times-gag-on.html

Seems like tabloid-wise this has some legs, but I'm still not sure there'll be proof enough for it to go MSM/CNN. So I put 20 on Yes.

@jenni....i see you beat me to it :O)

@dd - No yours is really quite different. Please post!

@Jenni
Thank you for "setting the bar" of neutrality in the way you phrase your questions. Too often, my personal viewpoint shows through when I am creating a political question.

I really enjoy seeing the liberal media bias exposed. If the National Enquirer was only able to create fallacies and distortions, they would have been sued right out of business by now. For that reason, I am wagering No on this question.

CNN has always been biased in favor of the liberal agenda but it seems that lately they've been growing more and more partisan in their reporting. I've been finding it increasingly difficult to watch them anymore. Liberal media bias, once chalked off as conspiracy theory, is almost completely out in the open now. Fox News stands alone against this media-wide juggernaut though their conservative bias pales in comparison to the opposition. Whatever happened to the concept of 'just the facts'?

I've been relying on Perez HIlton for all my info on this story!!

Perez Hilton - OMG
lol

Hilariously good call! Perez Hilton is far higher on my credibility list than much of the so-called "mainstream media".

@markov
<<< Fox News stands alone against this media-wide juggernaut though their conservative bias pales in comparison to the opposition. >>

Oh really, NO, O'Reilly.

@chatarra (5 comments ago) Thanks.. My philosophy is that the questions themselves should be neutral and then let the hubmasses decide for themselves. I'm happy to state my opinion in comments (or with h$), but I don't think its appropriate to bias a question from the get-go. Obviously not everyone agrees with me :)

@jenniandboys - Your comment, "questions themselves should be neutral", is unequivocally the best practice. In fact, it is worthy of being on the question guidelines page. It seems to have settled down lately, but at one time there were a lot of "see-through" questions floating around HubDub in which the thinly veiled animosity in the publishers' questions appeared to be more of a low-brow political ad than a legitimate question. I think most of us would rather wager on questions than interrogative statements. I prefer to get my Op-Ed fix from the comments section, which is almost always entertaining.

Recently, Jay Leno said:

"The National Enquirer caught former presidential candidate John Edwards sneaking out of his girlfriend's hotel room at 2:40 in the morning. Edwards got caught because the reporters were there waiting for him. See, If Edwards didn't want to get caught he should have met the woman at the hotel where John McCain was staying. There are no reporters there".

What do you know, there's a picture now. Hm.. wonder if its faked?

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/exclusive_john_edwards_love_child_photos/celebrity/65258

@eric 2. What was that you said about McCains "affair"? This is the first I've heard about this.

I believe eric was referring to this:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2008/02/20/n-y-times-suggests-unproven-adultery-mccain-unlike-clinton
http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerkimball/2008/03/08/why_is_john_mccains_non_affair/

That's correct, fingers...it was on the front page.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

That's correct, fingers...it was on the front page.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

The suspension date of this question, while unintended, is diabolical.
Edwards is starting to feel pressure about making some kind of statement on the "alleged" affair before the convention. Friday is the best day to slip a story into the news because it will historically get the least traction of any other day. If Edwards makes an announcement then CNN will have to finally report on it.
If no announcement from Edwards by Friday, then I predict this question will settle as No, and I can retain my sour beliefs about CNN being a major player in the Liberal Biased Media.

ABC just reported it.
I'm sure CNN won't be far behind.

It's true about the affair.

CNN reports


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/08/breaking-edwards-admits-lying-about-affair/?iref=werecommend

getting closer?

I think it is excellent that this question, along with <http://www.hubdub.com/m12279/Will_a_supposed_affair_between_John_Edwards_and_Rielle_Hunter_be_confirmed> were created. To me, this goes to the essence of what Hubdub is all about!

Kudos to both jenniandboys and dieseldog!

Oh snap!

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/08/edwards.affair/index.html

That was an easy 9k to make :>:>

NK. Wish I would have put more on this question.

ThomIsMyDad:
It's OK - You can have some of mine. . .

Predictions settled in the last 1 day. Resulting net earnings: hd$-18,966