If you were the editor of a large newspaper, what would you report ....?

[kentuck]

about George W Bush? What would say about him that is not being reported already. Take into account that there must be some facts or witnesses to the fact behind your story, otherwise you may lose what little credibility you have left.

It's your call. What do you report?

[eleny]

1. I'd put my best investigators on his health

I'd ferret out everything I could about his physical and mental condition and go with it if it was a tight story. That would put credibility squarely in the forefront.

Maybe not the best thing to do but it's the first thing that came to mind and stuck. I think it was that military style jacket he had designed for him that put me over the top.

[The Backlash Cometh]

2. I would report every evidence of fraud that I could get a hold of

and begin the process of showing the community that it exists, it's alive in the community, and if you don't want it, you have to demand a tougher criminal policy & lower tolerance level than the one that is currently being applied. Oh, yeah. And prepare them for the realization, that this will end up exposing many of the pillars of the community.

[TrustingDog]

3. hammer in the fact that's he's a patho liar - lots of material to go on.

[Newsjock]

4. Editors aren't autonomous anymore

Even at large newspapers, they're answerable to publishers, who are in many cases answerable to a "publication group," then to corporate, then to shareholders.

Any editor who tried to tackle such stories, without first cleraing them through all the layers of management, would quickly be an ex-editor. Sure, there is nobody stopping them from actually going out there and doing the work, but as soon as anything were to be published, that would end it right there.

That said, it would indeed be an act of patriotism for a rogue editor to write a startling exposé.