GORE STORY RISES – AT 6:23 P.M. ET:  We take no great pleasure in stories like this, no matter who they involve.  Sordid tales of personal misbehavior do nothing to advance the national dialogue.

But we are struck once again by the way in which the mainstream media carries the water for leading Democrats.  Even The Politico has noticed: 

The story of Al Gore’s alleged unwanted sexual advances toward a Portland, Ore., masseuse, which had been simmering since the National Enquirer first published the allegations last week, broke into the mainstream news cycle Friday after the Portland police announced they would reopen their investigation.

Anderson Cooper did a segment on the story on CNN Thursday night. By Friday, it was all over network television newscasts, while the Oregonian had a front-page mea culpa by the Portland police chief saying his department had mishandled the investigation when it first surfaced in 2006.

The story’s jump from the fringe to the mainstream compounds the problems for Gore, whose family spokesman, Kalee Kreider, has said that Gore “unequivocally and emphatically” denied making unwanted sexual advances. “Further investigation into this matter will only benefit Mr. Gore.”

And...

The mainstream media are still smarting from the embarrassment of being scooped by the Enquirer on the story of John Edwards’s affair with Rielle Hunter, which led to much handwringing in media criticism circles — including at POLITICO — about whether the press really vets presidential candidates. Books such as John Heilemann and Mark Halperin’s “Game Change” reveal that the affair was well-known to Edwards staffers, who considered leaking to the mainstream media but in the end did not.

Vetting presidential candidates?  If you're a Republican, every minute of your life will be examined by news organizations that have the resources to do it.  If you're Sarah Palin, reporters will go through your garbage. 

But if you're Barack Obama, no serious questioners need apply.  Obama was given a pass unprecedented in the modern history of reporting.

Now the networks and papers such as The Washington Post and New York Times are faced with a similar situation. Following the Enquirer’s second blockbuster scoop against a star of the Democratic Party last week, the mainstream media still treated the story as essentially a fringe narrative, with the first question coming from The Washington Post being: Did the paper pay for the story? The answer was yes, but not the $1 million that the masseuse, Molly Hagerty, asked for.

To be fair, Howard Kurtz was asking a legitimate question, since the accuser had claimed to be selling her story. But the fact that the first reported story in the Post asked this question, and not a question about the case itself, is revealing.

COMMENT:  We assert, of course, that Gore is innocent until proved guilty, and we are aware that his accuser is no great angel.  But the suppression of the story is inexcusable, but another sign that too many journalists see themselves primarily as advocates, rather than as reporters.  That, not the internet, is the single greatest disease eating away at journalism.

July 4, 2010