Paul Mulshine, writing in New Jersey's Star-Ledger, is one of the mid-level MSM reporters who have finally begun to wonder about what John Edwards was doing at the Beverly Hills Hilton in the wee hours of the morning -- besides, that is, ducking the National Enquirer posse. Perhaps he's also thinking about the dwindling influence of the MSM as Americans get a better idea of just how arrogant, manipulative and biased they can be.
As a member in good standing of the mainstream media, I generally tend to be skeptical of those in the blogosphere who accuse us of liberal bias.
But they sure seem to have a point with this John Edwards story.
The Edwards story is all over the internet -- including the liberal-leaning Huffington Post -- and is making headlines in the European papers. But the American maintstream media are ignoring it even though, as stories go, it's one of the best so far this year...
A lot of my fellow right-wingers say this is a classic example of liberal media bias. Imagine if Mitt Romney, who is a Republican equivalent of Edwards, had been caught in a similar situation, they say. By the next morning the story would be on the front page of every paper. By the next evening, Leno and Letterman would be competing for the best polygamy punch line.
But this story has been ceded to the internet, where Slate's Mickey Kaus asks, "Will this be the first presidential-contender-level scandal to occur completely in the undernews, without ever being reported in the cautious, respectable MSM?"...
So it's time the major media picked up the story. It's not merely the stench of liberal bias that bothers me but the unfortunate reality that we in the MSM are giving up a good story to the internet. And if we in the major media continue to cede such stories to the internet, we won't be major much longer.