We have heard stories of at least one instance where a newspaper or similar found out about Tiger Woods having affairs, and traded it for an exclusive or cover story in place of publishing about the affair.

Well itnNbits has it on good authority that a whole multitude of journalists around the world knew all about many indiscretions involving Tiger for quite some time – likely years. Apparently, by unofficial pact, journalists around the globe had agreed not to make it public.

Those in the know apparently decided that Tiger was doing good overall, and a positive influence. As such, he wasn’t going to be torn down by a journalist trying to make themselves famous by publishing the big secret story.

That was until the National Enquirer broke the news, and lo and behold, Tiger became fair game.

Now it’s moved on to herds of women, Ambien-fueled sex romps and who knows what is to come? The speed at which information has come to life has been very fast – quite possibly because lots of journalists had photos and information already, and all they had to do was dig up past information they had kept.

So readers, here is a question for you: do you think it right that journalists – whose primary role is to report (hopefully in a not-too biased manner) – should actively agree to withhold something that most would consider highly news-worthy?

You can argue that it is his private life (and it sure is…or at least was), but it’s clear from the amount of coverage, coffee shop conversations and TV coverage that the public deems the story news-worthy.

So what else are the journalists choosing to hide from us?

This entry was posted on Saturday, December 12th, 2009 at 6:07 pm and is filed under News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.