Page 8-Sunday, November 4, 1979-The Michigan Daily enquirer (Continued from Page 5) having seen the picture in the Enquirer. "I have no idea who would have taken advantage of a family during this situation. I don't know anybody who would want to do that, but maybe someday we'll know." The National Enquirer has few sacred cows, and less taboos. It surprises a lot of people, usually non- readers, that there is little sex in the tabloid each week. "We aren't even allowed to use the WORD," exaggerates one reporter, and, in truth, the Enquirer consistently uses phrases like "the couple have been spotted kissing and cuddling like young lovers" or, occasionally, "spent the night together," instead of the more graphic equivalents. The self-help and medical articles never contain references to direct improvement in one's sex life. Violence and gore are also out. No more "I Put My Baby In a Wastebasket and Poured Concrete Over Her," say executives. They look for upbeat stories that are "of interest to more than 50 per cent of the reading population," according to published inter- views with Gene Pope. What is of such interest to Enquirer readers are the doings of television celebrities, cures for "in- curable" diseases (arthritis and various cancers are the biggies), and simply all the visions of America's top "psychic" experts. Celebrity stories are Pope's bread and butter, and each week's issue is splashed with the face or faces of well-known personalities who have something in- teresting about them. In this regard, the Enquirer is hardly different from People Magazine (which sells for 75 cents vs. 40 cents for the Enquirer, and enjoys a much more friendly reputation) or any other publication capitalizing on the national peoplemania. A separate Los Angeles bureau is maintained almost for the sole purpose of chasing movie screen personalities, and the reporters consider these ar- ticles to be some of the very hardest to do. "If it comes down to it and you've got to sleep with someone in order to get a story, you're supposed to do it," says a female reporter. "Everything rides on the story." The "facts" are gathered from certain "in- siders," generally friends of the big wigs in question, who are bribed, lied to, or plied with alcohol to get them to talk. Some of the best "celeb" stories come from Enquirer freelance reporters (their pay per article is often outrageously high) who DO NOT have to identify themselves as Enquirer reporters. "As our reputation gets worse in Hollywood, it gets to be that only freelancers have a chance at getting the interviews," lamented a staffer. "We spend a lot of time in the office on government waste and medical stories." The stories on miracle cures and fabulous new vitamin treatments are started the way every other Enquirer story is started. Somewhere, someone comes up with a tidbit of information that is tran- smitted to Enquirer in the form of a "lead." The payoff for these leads-if they turn into stories-is almost $1,000, and so staffers, freelancers, and the reading audience all have their eyes open, looking for eye-popping information of any sort that might be turned into a story. Once the lead is accepted in a medical story, the reporter gets on the telephone and gathers all the in- formation possible from his primary source, say, the doctor who has "discovered" something and reported such in a journal. Once everything is un- derstood from this one doctor, the reporter then must find at least two other doctors who will sub- stantiate the claim of the first doctor. It doesn't matter how many doctors disagree with the first doctor. There can be hundreds, but THE WHOLE TRUTH DOES NOT INTEREST THE ENQUIRER. The final version of the story will present just the positive side of the issue, with no caveats. Speaking to the Miami Herald, Enquirer editor lain Calder said these medical stories do not provide balanced accounts or debates between ex- perts because "that will confuse the reader." In an effort to put everything on the bottom shelf for the evidently easily-confused readers (an Enquirer publicist reportedly once conceded that the paper was intended for "the 12-year-old mind in the body of a 35-to-40 year old housewife), the year is demarcated by the periodic predictions of the Enquirer's staff of psychic experts. These predic- tions are not strictly "upbeat," but they do dwell heavily on celebrities and interesting natural disasters (Enquirer readers must love disasters. The paper has a special reporter who goes to the site of every major earthquake and locates the person who has survived the longest trapped under the most debris). "The Enquirer has made me a very famous lady, and I'm very proud of it," says Mickie Dahne, who claims to be the Enquirer's leading psychic. "I love (Gene Pope). He's the most misunderstood person around." Dahne-who predicted Elvis Presley's trouble with drugs, but not his death, though she insists otherwise-claims 99 per cent accuracy in her mp-...------ I 7WIV w r . 4 4 _ .u ; , !f 5 V. gst 1 ° a . < r Photo by Editor and Publisher Magazine Ruth Annon, chief of research for the National Enquirer, checks a story with Priscilla Badger, deputy chief. prognostications, even though many of them are couched in extremely vague terms. ("We will hear. from Spiro Agnew again; I see trouble for Jackie Gleason"). She seems to be much less accurate in her specific predictions (Examples from Feb. 1976: Patty Hearst will break out of prison; Barbara Walters will leave TV; Johnny Carson will retire sometime this summer"). The accuracy of these predictions doesn't seem to be important to readers as much as the comforting idea that someone seems to be watching over the future. Says Dahne, "The predictions spice up people's lives." And spicing up people's lives has been refined in the grandest tradition of British journalism, where the tabloid newspaper splashed with dirt has reached a state-of-the-art form. Dig and scratch reportage is a native art form for the British, and the Enquirer staff is riddled with them. They ap- pear to enjoy the high living of an American tabloid newspaper reporter, and seem to be less bothered with problems of journalistic integrity than their American counterparts. "I learned a lot from the British," says an anonymous reporter. "They are exceptionally smooth interviewers: Really jolly, calling everyone 'love' and making friends with their subjects. They can talk people's pants off." So confident of their consummate interviewing skills are some of the "Brits," reports- another in- sider, that they will indulge in the practice of "pre- writing a story. This involves deciding exactly what the subjects ought to say to make a piece juicy enough for the Enquirer, and then not stopping until those exact words are in the mouths of the subjects. The American-side Enquirer staffers come from all over, most of them enticed by the astronomical salaries and the lure of huge traveling budgets. New recruits are drawn to Lantana through the Whiz- Kids program, in which college graduates (not usually with any particular bent toward journalism) are hired and given accommodations, a salary of more than $500 a week, and three months to prove themselves. The job, reporters say, is just barely worth the overwhelming salaries they are paid. Recruits are often seen slipping off to the bathroom to cry, and staffers talk of Enquirer employees who-like professional athletes before big games-vomit regularly to relieve the excessive tension. The result of working hard is an understandable tendency to play hard, and Enquirer reporters, quite rich early in their careers, tend to develop rather decadent lifestyles and drive heavily when off the job. As they become accustomed to the high life and acquire mortgages and families, the pressure to produce becomes greater and greater. The man chiefly responsible for this dread is the man who holds the pursestrings, owner Gene Pope. He purchased the Enquirer in 1952 when it was the New York Enquirer and had a circulation of a little better than 17,000. A former agent of the Central In- telligence Agency's psychological warfare office and a Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduate, Pope turned the Enquirer into a seamy, excessive rag that barely topped the one million circulation mark into the late sixties. At that time, Pope realized that he might do bet- ter to pattern his publication after the early Reader's Digest: Upbeat articles aimed at the mid- dle class. Circulation took off, and in 1971, Pope moved his headquarters to Florida where he hoped the good life would attract top editorial talent. In fact, former newspeople from UPI, ABC News, Time, and top British publications help Pope run his paper, although the circulation has leveled off at just under 6 million (more than any other weekly except TV Guide). Many reporters, uncomfortable with the journalistic methods of their employer, justify their tenure on the Enquirer by the comfortable climate in which they are allowed to reside. Still, the Enquirer's reputation for journalistic sleaze remained practically unmatched in this country as late as 1976. In December of that year a story ran from a freelance reporter claiming that Walter Cronkite said he believed in UFOs. After Cronkite made public statements damning the Enquirer's stories as a total lie from beginning to end, Pope decreed that all future interviews had to be tape recorded. The painstaking scrutiny that the Enquirer now gives every story costs them more than $2 million every year, and is the bane of every reporter who would like to fudge just one or two facts to make the editors happy. Reporters admit, though, that despite the frustrations, the attention they pay to detail makes them much better at careful research. "Those who think the Enquirer is full of lies and terrible things probably don't read it," says a staff reporter in Lantana. "We may shift things around in funny ways, but everything is true, and we never harass the little guy. All the human interest stories are done quite fairly and honestly. It's -the celebrities we're after. They're who people want to read about. "In a way I'm sick of apologizing for working at the Enquirer," he concluded. "We just entertain people and give them what they want. There's nothing wrong with giving people what they want. It's like a restaurant. You wouldn't go into a restaurant if all it served were beets and rutabaga, would you?" 5undag l I 5undog Co-editors Owen Gleiberman Elizabeth Slowik Associate editor Elsa Isaacson Supplement to The Michiggn Daily Ann Arbor, Michigan-Sunday, November 4, 1979