3 ms·
>they don't have a history of reckless reporting or shady practices like catch-and-kill a la the National Enquirer TIL that the 'National Enquirer' was the mos
by TMWNN 11mo ago
>they don't have a history of reckless reporting or shady practices like catch-and-kill a la the National Enquirer
TIL that the 'National Enquirer' was the most reliable news source during the O. J. Simpson murder trial. According to a Harvard law professor who gave the media an overall failing grade, the 'Enquirer' was the only publication that thoroughly followed every rumor and talked to every witness. <https://np.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/6n1kz5/til_that_the_national_enquirer_was_the_most/ https://np.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/6n1kz5/til_th...>
- philistine 11mo agoThat was an eternity ago. They’re no longer worth anything in terms of reputation.
- Fricken 11mo agoThey were never worth anything in terms of reputation, hence the "TIL"
- pge 11mo agoThe Enquirer also broke the John Edwards (vice-presidential candidate) affair story well before mainstream media picked it up. That doesn't make up for the reckless and sometimes completely nutso stories they print, but it is a reminder that they aren't always wrong.
- sigwinch 11mo agoThat’s going a little far, I think. The Enquirer was mentioned during jury selection and not for facts. When the defense wanted to leak a story, they went to the New Yorker.