When stories are interview-free
Simon Houpt, the New York columnist for the Globe and Mail, writes today (subscription req'd) about the ethics of the "write around", wherein a magazine does a story without an interview being granted by the central subject. Are magazines under some sort of obligation to disclose this? Provided the information is correct and the story a good and entertaining read, what beyond that is the magazine obliged to provide? There are some who would argue that the extra effort required to work around the non-cooperation of some star with a pneumatic sense of themselves can sometimes result in a better story. Discuss.
posted by D. B. Scott at
11:40 am
1 Comments:
Having been in some tough situations when "personalities" feel the need to "direct" the interview process, I agree with the sparing use of the "write around". The interviewee became so disruptive during the interview that not having it in the first place would be better.
Of course, due diligence must be persued, but in this day and age, when everyone's got a lawyer and an "image specialist", you can forget about getting the real story from the central subject.
The real choice would be to not cover these nasty people in magazines, newspapers, etc, but how likely is that going to happen?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home