Scrivener.net

It should get one, says Andrea Peyser.

After all, while the mainstream media slept, looked away, willfully buried its head, the Enquirer dug and dug to reveal the truth about one of the country's top politicians -- and potentially saved the nation great political trauma in the process. (Imagine if the Democrats had nominated Edwards, buying his whole line, and then inevitably the truth had come out.) And it did it practicing just the sort of journalism that Joe Pulitzer specialized in himself.

Enquiring minds are cheated out of Pulitzer

Old Joseph Pulitzer is doing flip-flops in his grave. The National Enquirer, which practices provocative journalism -- just like old Joe did -- is about to be mugged.

Investigative reporters toiling for the supermarket tabloid have pulled off a coup of epic proportions, saving this nation from the scoundrel who is John Edwards, and spurring an investigation that could land him in jail. But will the Enquirer win the Pulitzer Prize it so richly deserves?

Not in my lifetime...

The bombshell [reporting] should have won praise, prizes and the best possible restaurant tables for Enquirer types. Instead, the story was met with utter silence from the "mainstream" media. Until last week, when Edwards 'fessed up...

The journalistic establishment now has a chance to reward the Enquirer with its loftiest prize. It won't. The administrator of the Pulitzer board has already nuked the idea -- on a technicality.

He pointed out that, on its Web site, the Enquirer is called "the original celebrity entertainment magazine."

Magazines, you see, aren't eligible for Pulitzers.

This is a lame excuse, wrapped in jealousy.

The National Enquirer deserves accolades, not scorn ... It deserves a seat next to the snobs.