With all the hoopla about gossip rags it is amazing how many stories these sources break that are real news...
I think it was the Enquirer that broke the whole Lewinski thing wasn't it???
Yes, and also scooped the O.J. Simpson story. Still, the fact remains that people were scrambling to have the news verified as much of the Enquirer is an unreliable news source. Now that is sensational news if I ever saw it.
The difference is usually the major networks will verify a story before running it. NE and TMZ will run it with "Sources claim" before anything has been verified. NE has been sued a number of times for making false statements.
They do seem to be more willing to go wherever the facts lead however. Has any of the major networks reported on the climate warming scam? I think they all missed that.
__________________
"Beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow." ~Aesop
Yes, and also scooped the O.J. Simpson story. Still, the fact remains that people were scrambling to have the news verified as much of the Enquirer is an unreliable news source. Now that is sensational news if I ever saw it.
Adam and Eve's Bones Found in Colorado
Puleeze!
I was being somewhat TIC with this thread, but there is a hint of seriousness. I said I wish they would develop a political department that would be a bit different from the "Elvis in Walmart" Department (of course that only applies to the Nat'l Enquirer, TMZ doesn't do those kinds of stories).
However, when it comes to their treatment and investigation and willingness to expose real-life stories, their recent record is pretty good. I'm not saying that they are always reliable. What I am saying is that we can rely on this: if there is a story, they will tell it. Most of our outlets are too biased to be reliable anyway.
__________________
There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Chuck Norris lives in Houston.
Either the United States will destroy ignorance, or ignorance will destroy the United States. – W.E.B. DuBois
While ESPN and the networks were tap dancing around the Tiger Woods affair issue, TMZ was reporting it with the names involved and text messages he received right before the domestic issue with his wife. TMZ had them all scooped by a good 36 hours.
While the news media wouldn't even mention the John Edwards affair, the National Enquirer had people hiding out in hotels and confirming the proof of the affair.
I totally get what you're saying here TStew. TMZ's sources are generally several hours, it not a day ahead of news items on celebrities.
__________________
In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity. Augustine
I was being somewhat TIC with this thread, but there is a hint of seriousness. I said I wish they would develop a political department that would be a bit different from the "Elvis in Walmart" Department (of course that only applies to the Nat'l Enquirer, TMZ doesn't do those kinds of stories).
However, when it comes to their treatment and investigation and willingness to expose real-life stories, their recent record is pretty good. I'm not saying that they are always reliable. What I am saying is that we can rely on this: if there is a story, they will tell it. Most of our outlets are too biased to be reliable anyway.
I understand your point on their willingness to expose real-life stories and I agree that I would like to see them ditch the "Elvis in Walmart".
I would just want them, on a much larger scale, to be more willing to verify their stories before they print. But that's their MO and I understand that.
And even though they have been the "newsbreaker" in some instances, I still don't see how I could rely on anything they say - but hey - what news source do we trust? lol It's just that they have less credibility with Alien pictures on the front page. LOL! But you and I agree - we wish they would ditch that aspect of their reporting. Did I say that you and I agree?!!!!! LOL!
I understand your point on their willingness to expose real-life stories and I agree that I would like to see them ditch the "Elvis in Walmart".
I would just want them, on a much larger scale, to be more willing to verify their stories before they print. But that's their MO and I understand that.
And even though they have been the "newsbreaker" in some instances, I still don't see how I could rely on anything they say - but hey - what news source do we trust? lol It's just that they have less credibility with Alien pictures on the front page. LOL! But you and I agree - we wish they would ditch that aspect of their reporting. Did I say that you and I agree?!!!!! LOL!
The Enquirer has never (to my knowledge) been the paper to have the Elvis/Alien/Bigfoot stories on its cover. It is simply guilty by association since it is printed on the same paper stock and sold NEXT to the papers that do carry those entertainment stories. The Enquirer has always been more of a gossip rag.
The Enquirer has never (to my knowledge) been the paper to have the Elvis/Alien/Bigfoot stories on its cover. It is simply guilty by association since it is printed on the same paper stock and sold NEXT to the papers that do carry those entertainment stories. The Enquirer has always been more of a gossip rag.
Are you trying to confuse me on purpose? LOL! I read your post three times and I still don't understand what you just said. LOL!
Did I say that you and I agree?!!!!! LOL!
Linear Mode
