Are the tabloids EVER true?

No

Their purpose is to make money, not to provide information, thank you capitalism

@Trustinglife: I’m assuming you mean those colorful newspapers they sell at the check out stand, with the titillating headlines? I would imagine there is probably a bit of truth in some of the stories, but I’m more inclined to believe they use those headlines to pique interest. From my account, Jennifer Anniston has been pregnant 100 times per those papers. It’s probably not worth betting your money on. But you’re smart enough to know that and astute enough to figure out the mechanics behind their absurd statements.

Yes. They are every so often. John Edwards really did have that affair, they often split 50/50 on pop star issues so half of them are right (except for when they are allll wrong). But generally, it’s all trash. It’s just that even trash is right sometimes.

After 1978, when Carol Burnett sued the National Enquirer for claiming she was an alcoholic when she wasn’t (she won that case, by the way), American tabloids have been pretty careful to vet their sources. I order to sell papers and print gossip, they write the articles in such a way as to not constitute libel. It’s the people reading such stuff that make the mental leap from “he said she said” to truth by themselves.

In Britain, the laws are much more stringent as to what constitutes libel and slander, and the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused, as in the US, so things that wouldn’t get published here are published there.

If there is a grain of truth, which there is sometimes, it is obscured by the made-up salacious details it is served up with.

Absolutely. I once had drinks with elvis, Batboy and Bigfoot. Batboy is a dick, he got us all kicked out.