Kurtz cited mostly critics of the Edwardses' decision to stay in presidential race, ignored public support for choice

In his April 2 column, "The Story You Can't and Can Put Down," Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz wrote that the decision by former Sen. John Edwards (D-NC) and his wife, Elizabeth, to continue his presidential campaign despite the recurrence of Elizabeth's cancer "has touched an exposed nerve" and added that "many journalists are sympathetic" while "others have slammed the candidate." Yet Kurtz went on to cite three examples of journalists and media figures who "have slammed the candidate" and only one who supported the decision, radio shock jock Howard Stern's "sidekick Robin Quivers." Moreover, Kurtz did not mention findings of recent public opinion polls showing that a majority of the public supports the couple's decision to continue the campaign.

Among the critics Kurtz quoted was New York Daily News columnist Jane Ridley, who asserted in her March 27 column that "[a]mbition has blinded his [Edwards'] judgment and Elizabeth's too." Kurtz also highlighted Philadelphia Daily News columnist Jill Porter's remarks in her March 23 column that "[t]he decision is shortsighted and unrealistic, and ... his priorities are out of whack." Kurtz then quoted Stern as "saying: 'They got two kids. Go home. Be with the children. She needs to conserve her energy. It's a ridiculous thing.' " The only "sympathetic" figure Kurtz quoted was Quivers, who "countered" Stern by saying, "I don't think you have a right to tell this man how to run his life."

Moreover, Kurtz did not note polling that indicates that a majority of Americans support the Edwardses' decision and appear to disagree with those who "have slammed" Edwards for staying in the race. A recent CBS News poll found that 57 percent of respondents "said Edwards is doing the right thing by continuing to campaign," compared with 24 percent who "said he should have suspended his campaign or withdrawn entirely." The CBS poll was conducted March 26-27 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points. Similarly, a USA Today/Gallup poll conducted March 23-25 found that 58 percent of respondents said they thought Edwards "should stay in the race for president," compared with 29 percent who responded that Edwards should "drop out of the race." A Media Matters for America search identified no major poll finding that a majority disapproves of the Edwardses' decision.

Kurtz also wrote, "Some critics are dumping on Katie Couric's '60 Minutes' interview" with Edwards and his wife and asserted that "[t]he sniping is hard to understand, because Couric, who lost her husband to cancer nine years ago, handled the interview with considerable empathy, and the couple have said it was fair." Kurtz provided no details as to the substance of the "sniping" about Couric's interview. Several commentators have wondered, as Political Wire's Taegan Goddard did, why Couric kept "pressing John and Elizabeth Edwards ... about their decision to continue his presidential campaign when she didn't give up her job as host of the Today Show when her husband was diagnosed with cancer." National Journal columnist William Powers similarly wrote: "After her husband was diagnosed with cancer in the 1990s, Couric gamely forged on with her career. In short, she had been exactly where the Edwardses are now. This highly relevant fact was on every alert viewer's mind, yet she didn't even allude to it" during the interview.

From Kurtz's April 2 Washington Post column, headlined "The Story You Can't and Can Put Down":

But nothing has touched an exposed nerve like the Edwards cancer debate. And although many journalists are sympathetic -- or at least respect the couple's right to choose their preferred path -- others have slammed the candidate.

"Ambition has blinded his judgment and Elizabeth's, too," writes New York Daily News columnist Jane Ridley.

"The decision is shortsighted and unrealistic," writes Philadelphia Daily News columnist Jill Porter, and "his priorities are out of whack."

Even Howard Stern got into the act, saying: "They got two kids. Go home. Be with the children. She needs to conserve her energy. It's a ridiculous thing." But Stern's sidekick, Robin Quivers, countered: "I don't think you have a right to tell this man how to run his life."

Some critics are dumping on Katie Couric's "60 Minutes" interview with the Edwardses, in which she said: "Some say what you're doing is courageous. Others say it's callous. Some say, 'Isn't it wonderful they care for something greater than themselves.' And others say it's a case of insatiable ambition." The sniping is hard to understand, because Couric, who lost her husband to cancer nine years ago, handled the interview with considerable empathy, and the couple have said it was fair.

All the publicity has prompted others to come out of the cancer closet. NBC's Anne Thompson revealed last week that she received a diagnosis of breast cancer a year ago but kept it a secret because "I was afraid that people would feel sorry for me." She says she is now cancer-free after undergoing chemotherapy.