National Enquirer Wants Pulitzer Prize: Ryan Allen

The boy who cried wolf.  Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.  A broken clock is still right twice a day.  And even the National Enquirer breaks an actual story once in a while.  When a magazine notoriously displays bizarre yet inciting headlines as frequently as the National Enquirer does, its no wonder their credibility has been seriously shot.  This is an interesting dilemma because the story they investigated and uncovered was the biggest journalistic investigative success of the year.  However, the criteria for the Prize states that it is awarded based on newspaper journalism.  Newspaper obviously being the key word here.  This appears to me that the Enquirer wants the best of both worlds.  Clearly a "magazine" allows for more leniency in integrity when compared to a newspaper whose very name alone implies reporting of facts based on how they actually happened according to witnesses and observers who can provide real testament. 
 
Although the story certainly was Pulitzer worthy, it's not Pulitzer material.  If I go out and throw a football twenty yards further than the star quarterback does that mean I should be MVP of a team I'm not even on?  No. The genre of the magazine as a supermarket tabloid automatically disqualifies it for any award honoring newspapers.  Similarity, if an honor was bestowed upon tabloids, a newspaper would be out of the running.  I have no problem with the fact that the Enquirer pays sources for tips.  It's the American way.  Consequently, though, more often than not, they're left with bogus leads and quotes just so someone can get a few bucks by attaching their name on something.  And the National Enquirer appears to have uncovered the Edwards story through earnest journalistic effort. But, until they change their format and become a publication that reports reliable material consistently, they can't be given an honor like the Pulitzer. 
 
 I think the recent credibility the magazine has gained should be enough reward for Enquirer executives. Furthermore, maybe they won't be so quickly dismissed by readers as they once were.  I'm sure the Enquirer team is comprised of good, hardworking journalists.  Certainly the ones who worked on the Edwards story have something to be proud of, including a nice resume enhancer.  I''m curious to see if the magazine will try to further it's credibility with similar truthful, relevant stories, or if they'll continue to fabricate whatever they can to sell copies which most readers know is purely entertainment.