...Tonight at 8 pm on New England Cable News. We'll be discussing coverage of 1. John Edwards' affair and 2. "Clark Rockefeller."
Right now, I plan to say that the press as a whole was too slow to cover Edwards' dalliance. This isn't a private matter: for example, if Edwards' infidelity had become a major story at the beginning of the Democratic primaries, Hillary Clinton could be the nominee now rather than Barack Obama. So why the dearth of coverage? In no particular order, I'd cite sympathy for Elizabeth Edwards; distaste for the National Enquirer, which drove the story; and a general reluctance to chase scoops from other media outlets, tabloid or no.
Meanwhile, I have zero sympathy for the scolds who think the "Clark Rockefeller" story has received too much attention. Good God, people! This is an incredible tale, a real-life Talented Mr. Ripley in which Boston plays a starring role. If it's too tawdry for your taste, spend some time at one of the zillion other news outlets available on the Web until this saga simmers down.
Also, my preliminary research suggests that the Herald has been driving the "Rockefeller" coverage more than the Globe. But I may amend that judgment by this evening.
Readers, what say you?
UPDATE! I won't be talking about "Clark Rockefeller" tonight, but his attorney will. That said, in the wake of some bracing pushback from a Globie--"utterly off the wall" were the words used--I'll be posting tomorrow on the Herald and Globe's respective victories on that story.