Sorry Joe Scarborough and others: Bristol Palin's pregnancy was fair game
I can't speak to the question of whether Sarah Palin's daughter's pregnancy -- Juneau she is pregnant, right? Did Juno that? -- was a rumor whipped up by left-wing blogs. But I can tell you this. As a journalist, as a blogger , and as someone who was ahead of the pack in my arguing that the John Edwards story had legs and needed to be covered by the MSM, there was enough there to question Sarah Palin's pregnancy, just like there was enough there to question John Edwards's fidelity.
Now that it didn't pan out, we're blaming left-wing bloggers? Are you kidding me? Go find me the blogger not in bed with the GOP who would turn down the chance to blog such a juicy rumor. And here's the other thing: How long was the Palin camp going to wait to tell us about Bristol's pregnancy? They only rushed the story to the media because of a hot rumor that emerged from a legitimate piece of confusion: the absence of immediately available photos of a pregnant governor and the reports that Bristol was pregnant. Had the whole story been out front from the start, there would be no rumor, correct?
That's why the rumor was intriguing, even to those of us who found not one thing hypocritical about it. Let's face it, if there's one thing we knew about S.P. right up front, it was that she was abundantly pro-life. And even if you don't agree with her stance on abstinence, and believe her daughter's pregnancy exposed the weakness of that position (which it probably does but that's not really of interest to me), there is nothing inconsistent about welcoming another life into the world.
But good grief! Wouldn't you tell the news media this right away? And if you weren't even aware that the daughter was pregnant, what does this say about your supposedly months-long VP review process? As a teen pregnancy story, it's Jamie Lynn Spears level. As an indicator of John McCain's leadership, it's potentially Tom Eagleton level.
That's why you pursue the rumor.
UPDATE: Shari Elliker and I discussed the story this morning on WBAL Radio in Baltimore:
Listen/download: WBAL-9-2-2008.mp3
As I write this, Jon Meacham, the editor of Newsweek, is on "Morning Joe" imploring the media not to "blow it" or "screw it up" by digging into the Bristol Palin matter. If Jon Meacham were not the editor of Newsweek, and weren't appearing on this show (where Joe Scarborough is going batty claiming the media stepped "over the line" on this story) ... I can guaran-friggin-tee you if it were any other circumstance Meacham would not be saying that.
First of all, reporting a story in the blog age means acknowledging and repeating potentially damaging rumors that anyone can find online. This was what held up the John Edwards story so long, remember? MSM outlets were working the story hard. For months. They just didn't want to tell you that in print. And so the bloggers made such a cacophony that finally it couldn't be ignored.
(And by the way, if you read down into the comments on this story, some readers think we should still be pursuing the rumor. They are not entirely satisfied with the explanations given so far by the governor and the McCain campaign. I respond below, basically conceding their point, though my whole argument is that we don't cut off discussion of any newsworthy rumor just because it may strike certain people as crass or impolite.)*
The last thing a journalist should be concerned about is propriety. Is the story newsworthy? Does it set off alarms in the nonpartisan portion of the journalist's brain? Bristol Palin -- poster child for her mom's public position on teenagers and sex, as well as indicator of John McCain's vetting process for his VP candidates -- sets off at least two alarms.
So fine, MSM, go ahead and handle the story with "dignity" (Meacham's word). But don't fear the story because the hounds at Daily Kos are howling over it, and don't apologize for chasing a rumor. Sometimes it pans out, sometimes it doesn't.
