Your wrong.
I gave you an example of what was not reported under any circumstances- incest.
Locally, Howie Carr became famous because he spent time around reporters who had great stories about politicians and famous figures that they did not report, and Howie reported them to the embarrassment of mafia, politicians and others who otherwise would have gotten a free pass. He still does to this day.
Remember how Matt Drudge became famous; reporting on a story that was going to get buried.
The press looked the other way on FDRs polio but report today on Bush's religious convictions.
You can't be to old if you think the press didn't bury and cover up stories in the past. - tom
I explained to you that the lack of publishing incest stories was not a "coverup", but was a societal norm that recognized moral limits on printing sexual depravity stories, and also was due to a generational mentality that respected the modesty and embarrassment of the victims. Few people wanted to read that real ugly, seedy stuff anyway, and no victims wanted their good names in the press with this dirt. With today's more widely published accounts of incest, you are talking about a steady cultural devaluation in respecting the privacy and pain of others, it's about exploitation, not "coverups". Smut sells newspapers. Today they present themselves on national T.V. on the Oprah Show and tell the world all the seedy details of their incestual rapes. Generations ago women, (and men), had way too much modesty and sense of privacy to go that route.
I'm middle aged and from Boston too, I know of Howie Carr very well. He doesn't always break news, he often tries to create the news by stirring up people's emotions with his vile insensitivity, raw language, and cruelty to his fellow man. He makes a living off of kicking people when they're down, going so far as to take bets on which elderly celebrity is going to die next. None-the-less, the media have always carried stories of gangs, (The Winter Hill Gang), the Mafia, Eliot Ness stories of breaking up illegal booze cartels, the whole nine yards. And the media have always had an agenda --- as newspaper stories, old and new, will reflect their agenda. In the 1800's there was an endless parade of vicious cartoons and editorials slandering Catholics and the Pope. Especially Irish Catholics. The media ignored the widespread oppression and blatant prejudice against Catholics because they were part of it. So it's all about AGENDA.
Anyway, I dabble a bit in anitquarian books and antique newspapers, and I can guarantee you that the newspapers always printed the bloody murders, the rapes, the seedy crimes, the robberies, etc; just not with the same headline mentality, repetitiveness and mind-boggling drumbeat.