First of all, I wouldn't waste my time on a supposed hit piece if it comes from The National Enquirer, but a representative of Tim McGraw's is doing just that, anyway.

Yep, there's a story in People around that Tim McGraw has a secret son. Tim's rep is all over it, slamming the popular tabloid and citing its reputation as a reason not to believe. That's a good reason not to believe.

I have another one.

It ISN'T true, by The National Enquirer's own admission. The "secret son" in question--who's 23 years old, by the way--says that Tim was like a father to him. See, he's not even claiming Tim's his biological dad. And that's the basis of my question.

Why does something like The National Enquirer even care if the alleged source isn't even claiming biology? That's pretty tame stuff for a newspaper that's built it's reputation on, for example, finding the worst picture it can of any celebrity and then claiming that celebrity is dying or been arrested on some ridiculous charge or has throwing tire irons at people from the steps of city hall.

But to accuse Tim McGraw of being a father figure to a young man back in the day? Sounds more like a Hallmark movie than tabloid fodder.

You be the judge.