Dick Cheney is vice president of the united states and shot an elderly man in the face.

Blank Kennedy is a bi-polar low-ranking congressman who only got his job through nepotism and whose car crash didn't injure anyone.

I've seen people covering the car crash since it's a ridiculous story (a congressman who is both bipolar AND addicted to pain medication? What a winner). I think it's not surprising that it didn't get the coverage of the VP shooting someone though.
 

If you're counting relevance, it seems that the fact that a congressdude is kind of crazy would be more relevant than if a vice president is a shitty hunter.
 

I'm not talking about relevance, I'm just saying that the whole world knows who the vice president is. I didn't even know Ted Kennedy had a son. Celebrity = more coverage.

So it makes perfect sense that a super famous person shooting another person would get more coverage than a sort-of-famous person crashing his car without injuring anyone else. If he'd plowed into another car and killed someone, it'd have gotten more coverage, but still not as much as the VP shooting someone.
 

Well, yeah, obviously this is how the newsfolk work. That's why I brought it up. These newsfolk claim they're doing this great service for the world by their reporting (see their heroic BALCO work), but "relevance" isn't a consideration when they determine what to report.