Book Description
In two previous books, Janet Malcolm explored the hidden sides of, respectively, institutional psychoanalysis and Freudian biography. In this book, she examines the psychopathology of journalism. Using a strange and unprecedented lawsuit as her larger-than-life example -- the lawsuit of Jeffrey MacDonald, a convicted murderer, against Joe McGinniss, the author of Fatal Vision, a book about the crime -- she delves into the always uneasy, sometimes tragic relationship that exists between journalist and subject. In Malcolm's view, neither journalist nor subject can avoid the moral impasse that is built into the journalistic situation. When the text first appeared, as a two-part article in The New Yorker, its thesis seemed so radical and its irony so pitiless that journalists across the country reacted as if stung.
Her book is a work of journalism as well as an essay on journalism: it at once exemplifies and dissects its subject. In her interviews with the leading and subsidiary characters in the MacDonald-McGinniss case -- the principals, their lawyers, the members of the jury, and the various persons who testified as expert witnesses at the trial -- Malcolm is always aware of herself as a player in a game that, as she points out, she cannot lose. The journalist-subject encounter has always troubled journalists, but never before has it been looked at so unflinchingly and so ruefully. Hovering over the narrative -- and always on the edge of the reader's consciousness -- is the MacDonald murder case itself, which imparts to the book an atmosphere of anxiety and uncanniness. The Journalist and the Murderer derives from and reflects many of the dominant intellectual concerns of our time, and it will have a particular appeal for those who cherish the odd, the off-center, and the unsolved.
Customer Reviews:
How far should they go?.......2007-05-30
Joe McGinniss put himself on the map writing the classic 1969 book, THE SELLING OF A PRESIDENT. That book detailed how Richard Nixon was sold to the public like any other consumer product. It's worth reading if you can find a copy. The Nixon book was such a hit and McGinniss was so young he couldn't find material good enough to follow it up and his next few books were mediocre.
Determined to find another worthy subject, he tackled the case of Dr. Jeffrey McDonald, a man accused of killing his wife and children. That story became the bestselling FATAL VISION and this book, THE JOURNALIST AND THE MURDERER, chronicles the techniques that McGinniss used to get close to McDonald, and how he pretended to support McDonald through the years of legal proceedings although he always thought him to be guilty and wanted a guilty verdict for a better book. McGinniss' technique led to unfettered access to legal files, evidence, but most importantly access to McDonald. They'd drink together, strategize together and were pals during the experience.
The central question is how far can a journalist go to get the story? Although a jury found McDonald guilty of murder, a later jury found in favor of McDonald in his suit against McGuinniss because they felt that his techniques were so underhanded and self-serving that even a murderer deserved better. The book shows the divide between the win-at-any-cost media and the public that grows weary of the techniques used against people to create news. Does the public have the right to know enough that journalists can lie to subjects to bring the story to press?
This short book makes you question a number of journalistic techniques and it doesn't hurt either that McDonald has strong supporters and could possibly be innocent of the murders, at least in the context of this book.
There's more where this came from ..........2004-11-10
Ms. Malcolm slices off the hand that feeds her
With regard to item "a)" from "...pointless exercise," MacDonald v. McGuiness was over when Ms. Malcolm got involved. According to Fatal Justice by Palmer & Bost, McGuiness's lawyers threw a post-trial press conference for the court of public opinion: only Ms. Malcolm showed up.
Otherwise, Journalist & Murderer is mainly about journalistic ethics, if there are any. Here, McGuiness insinuated himself into the defense team (he was privy to trial strategy) of Jeffrey MacDonald, with the promise presenting him in the best possible light. When McGuiness sours on MacDonald, he puts up a cheery front & presses on. After Fatal Vision, MacDonald felt betrayed.
Of course, in our Cartesian-dualist society, since it's always either-or, we ask why he should feel betrayed? Guys convicted of killing their families have no reason to feel betrayed. They're bad guys; they deserve betrayal.
However, when McGuiness concluded that MacDonald was guilty, trial evidence just wouldn't do. McGuiness shamefully proved himself a member of the old Star Chamber (maybe Joe expected some votes as Cheney's heir @Halliburton?) by trundling out Cleckley's (1941) old psychopathology checklist & diagnosing Dr. MacDonald an incurable, speed-fueled sociopath. Dr. Phil's forbearer: super!
Ms. Malcolm is my favorite contemporary writer: she is foremost literate & like my favorite noncontemporary writer Mencken, she can be vicious without being vengeful. However, when you read, say, 1999's Sheila McGough, you may well wonder what sort of journalistic ruse Ms. Malcolm might cook up while slicing vegetables in the McGough kitchen. The Journalist & the Murderer is a blueprint for any such ruse. Better news is that after reading J&M, you can laugh without a twinge of guilt @gaudily & nightly paraded notions like "journalistic integrity."
Zero stars - pointless exercise..........2003-11-10
I'd have a bit more respect for Ms. Malcolm if:
a) she had actually attended MacDonald vs. McGinniss, so that she could write from an informed viewpoint instead of relying on second- and third-hand accounts;
b) she had spent less time oohing and ahhing over MacDonald's personal magnetism, and stuck to the facts of the case at hand;
c) she had bothered to read the literary releases to McGinniss's publishing company, SIGNED BY MACDONALD HIMSELF, that gave McGinniss license to write any type of book he wished (including, one presumes, a book that might actually say that McGinniss himself had concluded that MacDonald was guilty, despite the friendship the Journalist may have felt for the Murderer);
d) she hadn't stated - repeatedly - the total fiction that the jury hung 5-1 in MacDonald's favor. The fact is, the jury hung on ONE QUESTION OUT OF THIRTY-SEVEN, never actually voting on the other 36, because one juror believed that MacDonald had violated his agreements with McGinniss by cultivating other journalists and by ignoring his agreement not to sue McGinniss.
Or is MacDonald next going to sue Malcolm, because in her very title, she herself calls him a murderer?
Let's call an egg an egg, Dr. Jeff. You killed them. Pay the price. Be done with it.
Looking at the murky world of journalistic ethics........2003-06-30
In 1970, a respected army physician named Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald claimed that four strangers broke into his home in Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and killed his wife and two daughters. Although an army tribunal tried Dr. MacDonald and cleared him, years later the case was reopened. This time, MacDonald was convicted and sent to prison, where he still is today.
Janet Malcolm does not reopen the MacDonald case in her book, "The Journalist and the Murderer." Rather, she examines the issues behind a libel suit that MacDonald brought in 1984 against his supposed friend, Joe McGinnis, author of "Fatal Vision." Joe McGinniss posed as an ally of Jeffrey MacDonald for years. McGinnis lived with MacDonald for a while and even joined his defense team. McGinniss sent MacDonald sympathetic letters in support of his cause. In these letters, he frequently expressed his belief in MacDonald's innocence.
It was only after "Fatal Vision" was published that MacDonald discovered the truth. McGinniss did not believe in MacDonald's innocence; on the contrary, he portrays MacDonald as a psychopathic murderer. The author posed as a friend for the sole purpose of keeping MacDonald in the dark so that McGinniss would continue to have access to his subject. "Fatal Vision" became a huge bestseller and it eventually became a miniseries.
Malcolm's book, written in 1990, takes on added significance in 2003, when the ethics of journalists are under fire as never before. Time and again, a small number of journalists have been accused of plagiarizing and fabricating stories. The public is beginning to recongnize that reporters are fallible people who suffer from the same pressures, ambitions, and even psychological disorders as other ordinary mortals.
Malcolm's book is not merely a condemnation of McGinniss's behavior towards MacDonald. Her premise is that the journalist's relationship to his subject is, in its very essence, a perilous one. The gullible subject babbles away to his "sympathetic" listener, revealing more of himself than he realizes. When all is said and done, only the journalist and his editors have control over the final product. They are sometimes tempted to distort the facts to make the piece more interesting.
Malcolm asserts that certain journalists are con men who prey on people's loneliness, credibility, and narcissism to get a good story. Journalists have their own agendas and the "truth," which is elusive at best, is not always their top priority. Malcolm's book is a warning not to believe everything that is printed in a newspaper or a magazine, since each story is only one version of reality.
The ethics of blabbermouths.......2003-06-02
In The Journalist and the Murderer, Janet Malcolm examines the transactional relationship between a journalist and her subject, especially the dynamic of what happens during an interview. (Why do so many people repeatedly and voluntarily blabber stupidly to the media? Why is it so difficult to refuse a microphone?) And what moral obligation does a journalist have to her subject?
Malcolm answers these questions (as much as she's able to) in the context of a murder trail that journalist Joe McGinniss wrote about, after being given unlimited access to accused murderer Jeffrey MacDonald and his defense team. McGinniss, originally sympathetic to MacDonald, comes to believe that he is guilty of the murder (the jury agreed), but does not reveal his change of heart to MacDonald, in order to maintain access to him. Once McGinniss's book, Fatal Vision, is published, MacDonald is horrified by the portrait presented to him and sues McGinniss for fraud.
Malcolm raises issues that I, a constant reader of journalism, had never considered. Her book gave me insight into what a writer must do to get the story. She's made me a less naïve reader. Those long articles in The New Yorker will never seem the same.
Book Description
Producer, pundit, and media critic Jeff Cohen offers a fast-paced romp through the three major cable news channels — Fox, CNN, and MSNBC — and delivers a serious message about their failure to cover the most urgent issues of the day. Propelled by amusing anecdotes featuring famous pundits and media personalities, Cable News Confidential highlights the foibles, hypocrisies, and absurdities Cohen witnessed at news organizations run by entertainment conglomerates.
Customer Reviews:
Cohen explains my frustrations well.......2007-04-24
A big thanks to Jeff Cohen for confirming that I'm not crazy. He "found inside cable news was a drunken exuberance for sex, crime and celebrity stories, matched by a grim timidity and fear of offending the powers-that-be -- especially if the powers-that-be are conservatives. The biggest fear is of doing anything that could get you, or your network, accused of being liberal." If you keep in mind, it's not news (never was), then it makes it easier to swallow. After reading Cohen's account, you realize that Walter Conkrite would never get hired today in the face of fools like Chris Matthews, Sean Hannity, and Biff O'Really.
Great book!.......2007-03-05
I really enjoyed reading this book, and highly recommend it to everyone...especially people who don't really understand what a joke this all is..and how it became to be such a complete farce and and absolute threat to Democracy and so many other things sane human beings 'round these parts cherish.
Interesting read.......2007-01-04
A good read. Although the book felt a little short - I guess I'm used to novels - Cohen does get through his points without a lot of extra, unneeded pages. Some good anecdotes and references, and kept the story going at a good pace. You probably won't read this cover to cover in one sitting, but it still works read over a period of time.
Review: Cable News Confidenial.......2006-11-11
An excellent insight into the inner workings of cable news. I had no prior understanding of the increadable bias that exists on cable TV news. I highly recomment this book!!!!
A must read!.......2006-11-10
For anyone who watches cable news, Jeff Cohen's book is essential reading. He reveals how much corporations that own news outlets shamelessly distort the news. I hold this up there with Howard Kurtz's 2000 book "The Fortune Tellers."
Cable news has harmed the world, and reading these books will show you one of many ways they do so.
Amazon.com
Five years after his dismissal for fabricating stories, former New Republic hotshot reporter Stephen Glass released The Fabulist, a novel telling the story of a hotshot reporter named Stephen Glass who is fired after fabricating stories. And while the original incident provoked outrage, especially in Washington, The Fabulist is a mostly an empty exercise, devoid of strong characters, compelling action, or, finally, a reason to exist. Glass told lies, got caught, got fired, and then wrote a book about it. Why should we care? While interesting possibilities surely existed in tracing the arc of a career of fakery, Glass chooses instead to begin his story just as "Stephen" is being exposed for the first time. He fills the rest of the book by taking us through the character's dull and lengthy process of recovery as he seeks sanctuary with his parents, changes girlfriends, finds a new job and a new apartment, and avoids the spotlight of his scandal.
The Fabulist is populated with characters seemingly pulled from the scrap heap of numerous failed sitcoms: the Egotistical Boss, the Girlfriend Who Doesn't Understand, the Pushy Older Jewish Lady with a Single Granddaughter, and the Comically Mysterious Co-workers. Many of the characters are reportedly based on real people and are portrayed, disappointingly, as jerks and fools more deserving of derision than apology. Perhaps the most distressing part of The Fabulist is that there's no heart and no center. The central character, the only hero we are offered, never seems to understand who he is. He lies, those lies get him in trouble, he searches for an explanation or redemption for his actions, but neither he nor we ever understand what is to be gained from it all. Could the enterprise have been clearer as a nonfiction tell-all testimonial? Maybe. Would it be believed coming from the pen of Stephen Glass? Maybe not. But regardless of what one thinks of the ethics of the situation, it's disappointing that a writer of Glass's skill and obvious imagination couldn't come up with a more interesting novel. After all, he's written so much fiction in the past. --John Moe
Book Description
A NOVEL OF AN IGNOMINIOUS FALL, THE
RISE TO INFAMY, AND LIFE AFTER BOTH.
•
It is the summer of 1998, and Stephen Glass is a young magazine journalist whose work is gaining more and more acclaim -- until a rival magazine tells Glass's editor that it suspects one of his stories is fabricated. As his editor sorts out the truth, Glass is busy inventing it -- spinning rich and complex blends of fact and fiction, and exploiting the gray world in between.
But Glass is caught. His fabulism is uncovered and his career instantly unravels. Worse, his editor learns that it's not the first time. Soon, a long history of invention, passed off as journalism, emerges.
Glass suddenly becomes a household name -- an emblem of hubris and a flashpoint for Americans' distrust and dislike of the press. The media is consumed with the story: Once the young man who had been known for mastering the "takedown" article, Glass now becomes the one every journalist wants to take even further down. Once the hunter, Glass becomes the hunted -- the story of the year.
Glass responds to this agonizing public scrutiny with a self-imposed exile, first near Chicago with his family and then in the anonymous suburbs of Washington, D.C. There, he begins a long personal struggle with his misdeeds, working out his own answers to the questions of why he fabricated, how he can learn to stop lying, and whether, at age twenty-five, he has destroyed his life irrevocably.
Glass encounters a world far stranger than his own fabrications -- one populated by eccentric coworkers, ailing animals, angry masseuses, sexy librarians, competitive bingo players, synchronized swimmers, a soulful stripper, and a mysterious guardian angel who dresses only in purple. Meanwhile, Glass is chased by marauding journalists whose desperation and ruthlessness manage to match even his own.
As he dodges his pursuers, Glass grasps at straws only to find that, wondrously, they sometimes hold. Despite himself, he rediscovers the Judaism he'd left far behind in Hebrew school, and falls helplessly in love with a young woman who turns out to have her own shameful past.
In the end, The Fabulist is as much about family, friendship, religion, and love -- about getting through somehow, even when it seems impossible -- as it is about reality and fantasy. At once hilarious and harrowing, The Fabulist is one of the year's most provocative novels.
Customer Reviews:
Unbelieveable.......2007-01-12
Like many other reviewers, I picked this book up because "Shattered Glass" piqued my interest. I had high hopes that a guy who had successfully passed untruths for truth could tell a good story. I was so, so disappointed.
"The Fabulist" is a whiny tale of a journalist's fall and supposed rise, based on author Stephen Glass' real-life experience as a reporter who fabricated articles while working for The New Republic. Given this -- and the fact that author Glass named the whiny main character "Stephen Glass" AND tells this whiny story in the first person -- and it gets very difficult for the reader to separate the main character from author Glass himself. It's hard not to read it as a forum to explain himself.
Beyond that, some of the scenes seem very sitcommy. Others seem almost delusional. (Seriously, on more than one occasion, I fully expected a scene I was reading to be revealed as a dream, but that never happened.) I had A LOT of trouble suspending my disbelief, and I think that's because the narration is so uneven. The sitcommy and delusional scenes in particular seem jarring and out of place.
The book does offer some consistency, though ... it's consistently whiny. Character Glass always seems to be whining about something ... his co-workers lost faith in him, they didn't give him a second chance, or he feels so lonely and really, really wants a girlfriend. (Gimme a break!)
Furthermore, the only characters with any development at all are family members and the main character, and he's not very likable. Everyone else is just one-dimensional, and that, to me, is the book's biggest failing. Had narrator Glass exhibited some understanding of the people he had wronged by giving them more depth, perhaps it would've been easier to like the character, and hence, easier to like the book. The lack of understanding of the people around him, though, makes the main character and supposed hero seem highly self-absorbed. (Oh yeah, and whiny, too. Did I mention this book is whiny?)
A halfway effort either way.......2006-10-18
So, I'm going to presume that the main selling feature of this book to anyone (including myself) is the author's history and his scandal at the New Republic. I was, of course, interested in the fact that the author presents a self-named character and hoped to get some insight into "his side" of the story, even though the author makes it clear that it's offered as a fictional account.
Without that tantilizing detail, this book by it self is at most a C- in my mind. The writing struck me as unconvincing, the climax seemed premature and underdeveloped, and we spend a good 80% of the book either listing some unusual sexual experiences his character has or describing his breakup with his character's girlfriend or other unusual events. Again, it's fiction, so I have no basis to complain about the accuracy or presuppose this accurately reflects "what really happened" after what was undoubtedly a severely stressful time in Glass's life. Still, the parallels being so strong, one is left wanting to pare the truth from the fictional account; ironically much like the exercise his colleagues at The New Republic (TNR) went through.
I'm trying to figure out why Glass wrote this book. If it's solely to reclaim his name, it sounds like that ship sailed. As much as one hates to say that a person's prior mistakes are "unrecoverable", there are some things that cannot be undone. While there may be a position for him somewhere in the publishing business, I'm sure I would find myself, on every article I read where held a byline, sitting by the input box of my favorite search engine doing my own "fact checking". But I'll let those who work/will work with him worry about that. While TNR certainly holds some responsibility for lax fact checking, careers have been brought down with far fewer exposed misdeeds than Glass's.
If Glass was solely interested in making money (and there's nothing wrong with that; we all want to make money pedaling whatever skill we have), then as mean as it is to say, his TNR articles are far better fiction than this book is.
I'm really not in a position to offer Glass advice nor am I a party to whom he owes an apology. But I'm going to offer this, based on what I've seen in this book and the movie Shattered Glass. I suggest Glass take his own character's advice: allocute. Tell us what he did. Tell us why. And ask for a chance to make things right. It sounds like this book is an attempt at a first step to that, but it's ceratinly not sufficient if that's the case. No matter what, he shouldn't do it within the cloak of 'fiction'.
Otherwise I don't see how this book is going to further his writing career.
Just plain dreadful.......2006-07-03
The main character, who cunningly has the same name as the author, never really develops as a character. There are no changes or lessons learned. All of the characters are largely cardboard and unsympathetic. If you really have a burning desire to read it, try the library.
If you want to read Mr. Glass's better fiction, just pick up his articles from New Republic. They are much more entertaining.
The Fabulist.......2006-03-07
Is it too late to get a refund? Saw the movie so thought the book would be interesting. What a mistake! I'm an avid reader but half way through I wanted to throw the book away it was that bad! Too much self pity; every chapter more of the same. I lumbered through to the end wishing I had never wasted my time. It is now in the Goodwill bag. Probably should put a warning on this one: Buyer beware!! Don't waste your time!
Read the book not the reviews!.......2006-02-25
Most of these reviews (and those of the "professionals" when the book came out) reviewed what the writers thought of Mr. Glass and his supposed transgressions. Forget all that! Just read the book...and whether it's fact, fiction, or a mix of both (like most good novels), it's a great read and actually quite moving.
Book Description
In this phenomenal
New York Times bestseller, Neil Cavuto shares the inspirational stories of an array of personal heroes, many of whom motivated him to continue his career as he battled cancer and multiple sclerosis.
Joining the nascent Fox News Channel in 1996, Neil was set to establish himself as one of business journalism's most important players. Ten years after being diagnosed with cancer, however, Cavuto was dealt another body blow: He was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. As friends and strangers alike gathered to offer their support, he became attuned to the stories of others in the business world who also triumphed over serious setbacks of their own. More Than Money shares with us their personal stories, among them:
- Evelyn Lauder, the cosmetics executive who pioneered the pink ribbon campaign after her own battle with breast cancer
- Richard Branson, who overcame dyslexia and used his creativity and entrepreneurial spirit to build the Virgin empire
- Michael Wilson, a senior executive at the Royal Bank of Canada, who launched a public campaign to raise awareness of and money for treating depression after his son committed suicide
- Jon Huntsman, who survived two bouts with cancer to build one of the largest petrochemical companies in the world and found one of the most prominent cancer research centers
Moving, sincere, and wise, More Than Money profiles individuals whose stories are a testament to courage, compassion, and dignity in the face of adversity.
Customer Reviews:
surprisingly uninspirational.......2006-02-04
Stories of the rich and famous (mostly the rich) who were hit during their richness with a disease, usually a serious disease.
Cavuto speaks lovingly of them, hard to say whether it was because they were rich and successful or because they didn't go into a tailspin when bad news hit. No great insight, however, comes from his reviews, or interviews, or analysis. The possibilities were there but the book fell short. Sadly, so many people do good things AFTER they are hit by MS or their child is hit by a drunk. Not to minimize their good deeds, but motivation is easier than it would be for Joe Schmoe who simply feels the need to aid the Lepers or feed the hungry or get rapists off the street. While these people took action, it took personal loss to get them off their seats, and as I said, admirable, but motivated by self. Some of what I read between Cavuto's lines is the shock that this could happen to rich people- duh- it happens to all of us and most of us don't have the means to do things about it.
Excellent Book - What Really Matters .......2005-10-21
It is very nice to see someone talk about business in a way that is touching and human. After all the huge scandals of rich business people screwing the little guy, reading about these heros is quite refreshing. It gives you hope that maybe there are still a lot of GOOD people left in this world.
The stories are very personal, touching, and uplifting. I highly reccomend this book to everyone.
I just think Neil is cool........2005-10-18
I watch this dude every time I get a chance. He's cool. His show is intelligent and balanced. It's relaxed but not lazy. He's firm but not overbearing.
For some reason, one of my books is always listed on his amazon page and this one is listed on mine "The Wisdom of Shepherds." (I also wrote The Greatest White Trash Love Story Ever Told,where my email address is displayed). I am honored that my book is connected to Neil's. I would like nothing more than to be on his show-- heck I might even offer up my controversial social-policy opinions or something like that.
Anyway, Neil is the man. Watch him. Buy this book. Seriously, buy this book.
Inspirational.......2005-10-16
This is an inspiring collection that relates the stories of numerous people who have overcome.
The people included have overcome serious diseases, paralysis, family deaths, business failures, and more. It included stories of well known people such as NY Yankees Manager Joe Torre and former Congresswoman Geraldine Ferraro.
Cavuto himself has struggled through cancer and Multiple Sclerosis. He doesn't spend a lot of time on his own story, but definitely illustrates that he knows how to overcome. His attitude about his own troubles is really amazing. He talks about how his illnesses have helped him to become more of a human being. Speaking of that, he said: "It's one of the reasons I tell people I'm lucky to have come down with cancer and now MS."
He makes the point that we all struggle and suffer with various issues throughout life. It is the way that we deal with them that makes all the difference.
The only part of it that I didn't appreciate was a section where he was discussing a Congressman who is a quadriplegic. This person has accomplished a lot, which is great. The bad part is that Mr. Cavuto goes into an anti gun diatribe while discussing it. I think that the book would have come across a lot better without that unnecessary rant.
Nevertheless, this is pretty good and has lots of inspiration for those struggling with something. It is a worthwhile read.
A Truly Inspiring Book!.......2005-04-25
Mr. Cavuto has done an excellent job of profiling well-known people who have responded to their devastating ordeals with unselfish courage and personal integrity--people who became stronger, better people in the process. Their ordeals brought out the best in them and they, in turn, brought out the best in others. This is a book about the indomitability of the human spirit and, as a cancer survivor myself, I found myself identifying with many of these people. Suffering is universal but how we respond to our suffering makes all the difference, and the people profiled in this book are great role models for all of us. Highly Recommended!
Book Description
The nature of journalism requires that ethical decisions be made at every stage. While many of these decisions lead to obvious choices, many present thorny problems; some questions may be so subtle that they are not even noticed consciously by the journalist. This up-to-date collection of more than two dozen real-life cases illustrates the moral issues facing contemporary American journalists. It will help students hone their reasoning skills, encouraging them to think rationally and act with integrity. The cases are presented in substantial detail to provide students with a realistic sense of the complexity of issues facing journalists today. Knowlton, a veteran journalist and teacher, combines his experience of more than 30 years in the field with extensive interviews with dozens of today's top journalists, so that each case is presented with commentary and thought-provoking analysis. Discussion questions at the end of each case analysis probe the depth of the ethical concerns raised. This book can be used as a stand-alone text, as a supplemental casebook, or in conjunction with the companion anthology, The Journalist's Moral Compass: Basic Principles (Praeger, 1994).
Customer Reviews:
Useful Primer on Ethical Dilemmas in Journalism.......2004-06-21
This is an extremely well written collection of essays and case studies outlining the ethical issues behind journalism, which can be useful to both practicing journalists and media watchdogs. The book starts by dividing journalistic ethics into political, philosophical, and economic categories, in addition to issues of objectivity and privacy. This is followed by real-life case studies in which reporters and editors had to make tough ethical decisions regarding everything from crime to suicide, AIDS to car accidents, and political scandals to war reporting. The most refreshing aspect of this book is its insistence that none of these ethical crises have clear cut-and-dried answers, and that the process of examination and decision making in the face of such dilemmas is most important, while much can be learned from the experiences of the real-life journalists profiled here. This book impressively covers these very difficult questions. [~doomsdayer520~]
Nessesary for any Journalist.......2003-11-15
A terrific and entertaining read for anyone but a nessesity for any and all journalists.
A must for journalists.......1999-12-20
This is a very good book and any journalist should read it. This is a very thorough book. A good read.
A definite tool needed in a budding journalist's toolbox!.......1999-02-22
The book was thorough and efficient. The cases are challenging but are given to expand and open a journalist's mind ethically. The commentaries help the reader sort out what they just encountered while it presents all sides of a possible ethical decision. The commentaries doesn't demand that the reader take on a certain ethical decision, but instead produce options that exercises the student's mind. Literally, a reader's brain will hurt after closing this book. However, it's a good thing, the book works to produce ethically thoughtful journalists who will venture out into the field. It is a book I plan on keeping on my shelf, while keeping it's teachings in the back of my mind.
Amazon.com
Joe Queenan knows what a maleficent scuzz he is. In My Goodness, he admits he wrote a Barbra Streisand profile called "Sacred Cow" in his scurrilous book If You're Talking to Me, Your Career Must Be in Trouble. He apologizes for calling Sinead O'Connor "a short, bald distaff Bono" and for wishing Mr. Holland's Opus had ended "the same way as Braveheart, with Richard Dreyfuss getting his entrails ripped out while a cast of thousands cheered." Queenan figures that most of the 1,441,575 words he wrote from 1986-98 (including every word in Confessions of a Cineplex Heckler) were mean, containing "47,678 nasty remarks, or one cruel remark every two sentences."
So Queenan embraced virtue as passionately as Jackie Collins heroes embrace vice. (You'll have to read page 146 of My Goodness to get this vulgar in-joke.) He began performing "RAKs" and "SABs" (random acts of kindness and senseless acts of beauty). He bought the most putrid movies by Robin Williams and Kim Basinger, to support their do-good deeds. He sipped shade-grown coffee and kale-based shakes. He wrote checks on soy and hemp paper for the Dog Toy Drive and Linda Tripp. He started "The Make a Wish, As Long As the Wish Doesn't Cost More Than Fifty Bucks, Foundation." He urged Tom's of Maine to put "cuddly rats" on its toothpaste tubes in solidarity with downtrodden vermin.
After six months, Queenan went back to work as a maleficent scuzz. But you can read this book and share his one brief, shining moment as the moral equivalent of Susan Sarandon. --Tim Appelo
Book Description
Years upon years of being unspeakably nasty to icons as diverse as Jimmy Carter, Barbra Streisand, and even Mother Nature herself had taken its toll on Joe Queenan. The man all editors turned to when they needed a book, film, or tv program savaged was tired of being so mean. He wanted to be more like Susan Sarandon. Or Sting. Determined to mend his ways, Queenan embarked on the most difficult task of his career: he decided to become a nice person. Now available in paperback, My Goodness is the side-splitting result of Queenans attempted transformation: from his use of animal-friendly Body Shop goods to his letter of apology to Jackie Collins after a scathing review of her latest book; from his quest to save the whales to his quest to save Linda Tripages.
Customer Reviews:
In which Queenan attempts to morally upgrade his personality.......2005-03-03
And of course fails miserably while learning that which he knew all along, namely that moral goodness is just another of life's many delusions.
This was my first encounter with Joe Queenan, and he is a very funny man. There's a lot of laugh-out-loud, self-deprecating/self-promoting verbal hijinks in this thoroughly enjoyable comedic romp through do-gooder land. Queenan assures us that he is the kind of guy who would tear the wings off the backs of flies and feed them to his pet rat while keeping the juicier parts for himself, and laugh while he was doing it, the kind of miscreant that would mock Mother Teresa for dressing dowdy or Jesus Christ for having a bad temper or Ramakrishna for liking the boys a little too much. In other words, the man's a moral degenerate.
So what to do about it? How about a complete moral make-over? How about emulating the vapor-headed targets of his mean-spirted satire, bleeding-heart liberal mush heads like Susan Sarandon, Jimmy Carter and Paul Newman? How about BECOMING that which he trashes? How about actually committing "random acts of kindness and senseless acts of beauty" and writing a book about it?
Oh my. Sounds pollyannaish at best, downright pinko at worse. Rush Limbaugh and the editors of various right-wing rags are sticking sweaty fingers under their necktied collars in clammy anticipation of such a sell-out. Fear not. Bottom line is there's a book contract to fulfill, and anyway the title assures us that Queenan sees the light long before he descends too far into that tunnel of delusion. All philanthropy is, after all, just advertisements for oneself, demonstrating for the huddled masses that one has the wherewithal to afford such largess. And all do-gooders are at heart just guilty consciences seeking cheap redemption.
Joe starts with an inventory of his "personal vileness" and finds that over the past twelve years in various publications he has penned "47,678 nasty remarks...2,537 ad hominem attacks, 1,123 gratuitous asides, 342 cases of pure slander, and 564 examples of unconscionable cruelty" (p. 19). Then he recalls "A Short History of Goodness, from Jesus Christ to Sting" in which he employs one of his primary comedic devices, the incongruous juxtaposition of the names of the holy and revered with the assorted targets of his discontent, e.g., Mahatma Gandhi with Ben & Jerry of Ben & Jerry's ice cream, Desmond Tutu with Kim Basinger, and the cute commingling of Albert Schweitzer with Julia Roberts. (He didn't actually make this last coupling, but I'll do it for him, since such a joining is entirely within the spirit of his intent.) Then he throws out the toiletries manufactured by companies that use animals in experiments and buys himself some socially conscious Tom's of Maine toothpaste, etc. Here he employs another of his very clever comedic devices, namely that of damning by exaggeration (a neat variation on the time-honored damning by faint praise), e.g., mentioning Ben & Jerry's opus, "Double-Dip" with the "Bhagavad Gita."
Then he regales us with tales of actually acting out random acts of kindness and senseless acts of beauty, which he abbreviates as "RAKs" and "SABs." Particularly poignant was his search for a subway minstrel whom he would help by improving the poor man's faulty rendition of Schubert's "Ave Maria." His experience with the Harvard-educated Indian-American physicist who wanted Queenan to send him a pro bono copy of an obscure Elvis Costello CD is a tale almost too redeeming for the otherwise ironic tone of this book, and incidentally a tale all writers will particularly enjoy. Additionally, because Queenan is a particularly splendid example of that very rare creature, a successful free-lance writer, all those who aspire to write for a living will benefit by reading between the lines here for tips on how to write magazine articles for fun and profit. I would guess that Queenan's secret (aside from being a truly gifted wordsmith) is a consistently energetic self-promotion on all fronts. Either that or buying Microsoft when the Dow was at 3700, as he reports, and then faking it.
Queenan is also a master of the unexpected and ironic congruence. A nice example is his giving "Krispy Kremes, shrink-wrapped" to a dissident in Washington D.C.'s Lafayette Square only to notice that the protester had not yet actually partaken of his heart-felt gift, occasioning Queenan to optimistically observe that "in the fullness of time he might see fit to open them."
I must admit I laughed out loud several, maybe even numerous, times while reading this very clever put-down of the icons of pop culture, and enjoyed it all thoroughly, especially the part where he sends Linda Tripp a care package of organic groceries. What I want to do is go back and find his earlier work of social satire, Red Lobster, White Trash, and the Blue Lagoon and see what nasty things he has to say about the once-adorable Brooke Shields, et al.
Funny but Phony.......2002-12-10
That's my three word synopsis of this book and the other Queenan book that I read, Red Lobster, White Trash, and the Blue Lagoon.
There is no question that Queenan is funny. I continually drew attention to myself on a cross-country flight by laughing out loud, uncontrollably at certain points.
But in the end, Queenan's journey into the world of do-gooders is so transparently disingenuous that I wanted to throw the book into the recycling bin when I was finished laughing--just like I would do with one of his magazine articles. Queenan plays with the behaviors of do-gooders, but never probes the beliefs or motivations of his subjects. A true satirist would find humor in the self-righteousness of some environmentalists, social activists, etc. and not just in the products that they consume.
There is a long section where Queenan apologizes for being cruel. He apologizes to Sinead O'Connor for lambasting her in public while privately owning and enjoying all of her records. However, when he recants his pledge to be "good" at the end of the book, is he also taking back his apologies? Were they also a phony exercise designed to get laughs?
He claims to drag his family along on these adventures. What do they think when they discover that it was all a ruse and that nothing really changed?
If you want read a book that will also provide uncontainable whoops of laughter and genuinely satisfying content, try David Sedaris's Me Talk Pretty One Day.
Queenan is an American Treasure.......2002-06-14
I'm often astonished by critics of Joe Queenan's books. Yes, he is mean. Yes, he is cruel. And yes, he is hilarious. If people are so offended by his material, why read it? Oh well, that is a subject for one of Queenan's own articles. I could not put this book down. This is third Queenan book I've read (along with Cineplex Heckler and Red Lobster) and this is as good or better than the other two. He makes many of the same points that Nick Hornby tries to in "How to Good." The difference (besides the fact that one is fiction) is that Queenan nails it. He tries hard to be good and fails. Of course he does. Neverthless, the journey is fascinating. He is one of the few writers who doesn't give a damn and tells you how he feels. You don't have agree with everything he says to enjoy his work. I admire a guy with those kind of guts (and who grew up on the mean streets of Philly--they grow guys like this there on trees). In addition, several critics have commented on his "right wing" writing--which is hilarious because Queenan slams the right wing many times in his book. He also dares to take on the leftists. He tries to learn about their culture and realizes that is filled with some good ideas--but is also subject many hypocritical failings. I laughed outloud countless times. Ok, so maybe I'm just the kind of Yuppie trash that Queenan is, but he really hits the nail on the head. As a photograph of America at the turn of the century and all it's absurdities, Queenan hits another home run. He wins again--which is better than he beloved 1964 Phillies did.
Joe is a gifted writer, but this is not a good book.......2002-06-12
I have not read Joe's work before but it is clear that he is a gifted enough writer to make a decent living at it. I imagine that writing directly about yourself is much harder than doing a hatchet job on another author's work. (So few writers, so many Amazon reviewers...) Joe swings the axe like the tough kid from Philly, but his search for Sainthood by embracing shade grown coffee and cruelty free products just isn't genuine enough to be funny. I am sure any of his other articles that he excerpts indirectly in a long list of apologies for former misdeeds are much better. Save your money and read Joe's next hatchet job in Playboy or Rolling Stone. Joe is a gifted writer, but this is not a good book.
Sensless acts of ego rather than sensless acts of beauty.......2002-05-28
Synopsis is as follows: Cynical journalist feels guilty for being a cynic so decides to repent, by being cynical. Of course it is just an opportunity to get into print everything he has ever thought and every letter he has ever written. Therefore satisfying his quite frightening ego. A man of talent would have the ability to convert the everyday into a book, a journalist can merely report, and unfortunately does not know when to stop.
However, it was enjoyable in its pointlessness and no doubt gave Queenan the autodidactic comfort in knowing a tree has been destroyed to immortalise his senseless ego further.
Average customer rating:
|
The Ethics of the Story: Using Narrative Techniques Responsibly in Journalism
David Craig
Manufacturer: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
 Media Studies
| Mass Media
| Current Events
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Journalism
| Writing
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Newspapers & Magazines
| Writing
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Performing Arts
| Arts & Photography
| Subjects
| Books
Similar Items:
-
The Journalist and the Murderer
ASIN: 0742537773 |
Amazon.com
These are tough times for journalism. Newsroom executives' bonuses tend to be based on their company's profit margin. Journalists are constantly jockeying for the time and space necessary to tell their stories as they see fit. Only 47 percent of Americans even read a newspaper. And Time and Newsweek--news magazines, remember?--"were seven times more likely to have the same cover story as People magazine in 1997 than in 1977."
It's no wonder that in 1997, the Committee of Concerned Journalists formed to "engage journalists and the public in a careful examination of what journalism was supposed to be." The Elements of Journalism reports the results of that study, which included 21 public forums (attended by 3,000 people), in-depth interviews with 100 journalists, editorial content studies, and research into the history of journalism. Part of what the committee members learned, they already knew. Journalism is complicated business: journalists are paid by management but work for the citizens; they tend to be self-taught (there is little evidence of mentoring and much disdain for journalism schools); and they need to be objective even when they're not impartial. This has always been the case. But the committee also detected a trend, one abundantly evident to anyone who has tried to find news on the evening TV news: "news was becoming entertainment and entertainment news."
"Unless we can grasp and reclaim the theory of a free press," warn Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel, the book's authors, "journalists risk allowing their profession to disappear." Through their discussions with journalists, the Committee of Concerned Journalists defined nine "clear principles" of journalism, which Kovach and Rosenstiel explore in great detail. The first principle is, "Journalism's first obligation is to the truth." The last: "Its practitioners must be allowed to exercise their personal conscience." In between come issues of loyalty, verification, independence, and power monitoring, among others.
Invigorating reading for newsroom interns, jaded reporters, and anyone else who needs to be reminded of the rigorousness, integrity, and meaning of journalism. --Jane Steinberg
Book Description
In July 1997, twenty-five of America's most influential journalists sat down to try and discover what had happened to their profession in the years between Watergate and Whitewater. What they knew was that the public no longer trusted the press as it once had. They were keenly aware of the pressures that advertisers and new technologies were putting on newsrooms around the country. But, more than anything, they were aware that readers, listeners, and viewers — the people who use the news — were turning away from it in droves.
There were many reasons for the public's growing lack of trust. On television, there were the ads that looked like news shows and programs that presented gossip and press releases as if they were news. There were the "docudramas," television movies that were an uneasy blend of fact and fiction and which purported to show viewers how events had "really" happened. At newspapers and magazines, celebrity was replacing news, newsroom budgets were being slashed, and editors were pushing journalists for more "edge" and "attitude" in place of reporting. And, on the radio, powerful talk personalities led their listeners from sensation to sensation, from fact to fantasy, while deriding traditional journalism. Fact was blending with fiction, news with entertainment, journalism with rumor.
Calling themselves the Committee of Concerned Journalists, the twenty-five determined to find how the news had found itself in this state. Drawn from the committee's years of intensive research, dozens of surveys of readers, listeners, viewers, editors, and journalists, and more than one hundred intensive interviews with journalists and editors,
The Elements of Journalism is the first book ever to spell out — both for those who create and those who consume the news — the principles and responsibilities of journalism. Written by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel, two of the nation's preeminent press critics, this is one of the most provocative books about the role of information in society in more than a generation and one of the most important ever written about news. By offering in turn each of the principles that should govern reporting, Kovach and Rosenstiel show how some of the most common conceptions about the press, such as neutrality, fairness, and balance, are actually modern misconceptions. They also spell out how the news should be gathered, written, and reported even as they demonstrate why the First Amendment is on the brink of becoming a commercial right rather than something any American citizen can enjoy.
The Elements of Journalism is already igniting a national dialogue on issues vital to us all. This book will be the starting point for discussions by journalists and members of the public about the nature of journalism and the access that we all enjoy to information for years to come.
Customer Reviews:
Abstract/Strategic overview; Journalist's, not public's, perspective.......2007-01-05
This book is probably a good overview for someone new to these issues. However, for someone like me who has been interested in these issues for years, there is little here that you wouldn't have already seen in the newspaper coverage of this topic. I had hope of finding some pithy characterizations of the issues, but this book contained none that I hadn't already seen. However, for the newbie, this book does a good job at collecting and presenting them (and citing sources). And it is very readable.
My biggest disappointment was that the authors chose to exclude the issues of fairness and balance - as a person involved in events covered by the press, this is my biggest source of frustration with journalists. The most common problem is with the structure of an article: One side's position and arguments are given, and repeated, in the beginning and middle of the article, with other points of view not appearing until near the very end. When I try to talk to the journalist about the well-known problems with this structure, my comments are routinely dismissed with "But its all in there."
Note: By "fairness" and "balance" I mean what is understood by normal people and not the bizarre, discredited definitions used by journalists. Rather than try to rehabilitate these terms (a difficult task), the authors attempt, unsuccessfully, to introduce replacements (for example, "proportionality" which is presented by an unsatisfying metaphor).
My second disappointment was that the portion of the title "and the Public Should Expect" is an empty promise: The book is entirely focused on the journalist's perspective.
I did find it interesting the number of times that the authors commented that journalists were *not* trained in key aspects of their job but had to figure it out for themselves. This confirmed intuitions developed from my experience with journalists.
Captures all important elements of journalism.......2006-08-10
After reading Lippman's Public Opinion, this book provided a good review of what has happend in recent years.
The journalism is heading for a new direction, while preserving the old core values.
No stone is left unturned in this book with regard to journalism.
very good.......2006-02-20
I received the book in a good delay, and it was in perfect condition!
Great finish, no start........2005-03-21
I read this book as a first year grad student studying journalism. It's an interesting read - probably the only book I read that whole semester that I actually liked. It leaves the reader with a sense of purpose and commitment to the craft of journalism.
Then I went out and start reporting in the real world. I immediately realized "Elements of Journalism" is hopelessly idealistic. The book has a great vision for where the profession should be, but no suggestions on how to get there.
absolutely loved it.......2004-11-25
For my journalism class, I had to choose a book of merit about the media. "The Elements of Journalism" doesn't disappoint. This book takes the form of an instructional guide in that its objective does tell what journalists should be doing in order to create an effective press and what the public should expect from it. I find "The Elements of Journalism" to be of great use since it outlines what every budding journalist should follow to maintain ethics, objectivity, and truth in their work. It even describes man's history with the need for communication and a briefing of journalism's role in history. The book is written with clarity and the topics flow together. I also noticed that Kovach and Rosentiel developed many "theories" of the media-which all seem true too.
What will always stay with me is the "The Theory of the Interlocking Public"-that states that everyone has an interest and is an expert in something. We need to be knowledgeable about the realistic description of how people interact with the news in order to present information as accurately as possible so that an individual group is not drawn to an article but a WHOLE variety of people depending on their level of knowledge about the world. Good journalism targets each level. I always remember this while writing an article for the paper.
As for what citizens should expect from the press, I admired the quote "The marketplace fails if we as citizens are passive, willing to put up with a diminishing product because we have no alternative. It works only if we act with a voice and a reason." It basically means that the purpose of a press (to convey the information that people need to be sovereign) will deteriorate if the people don't take action and speak up in what they believe in and hold true.
And, I can go on and on....because this book is so full of insightful information. I recommend it for anybody interested in the workings of the media.
Customer Reviews:
Please print this again.......2004-01-14
This is a fantastic book. As an editor, I loved the book. Now as a journalism professor I make use of it in my Mass Media Ethics class. It is straightforward, thought provoking and provides excellent real-life case studies to discuss ethical issues.
It's a shame it is no longer in print. Please, please, someone print this again.
Book Description
What basic ethical principles should guide American journalists to help them justify their invasion of an individual's privacy, to be "objective" in their reporting, to avoid being influenced by government or economic controls? A wire service and newsroom veteran and a sociologist and scholar in mass media/communications have designed a philosophical guide for students, scholars, and practitioners to use as a kind of "moral compass." Key excerpts from some of the most important writings on the subject from Milton to Louis Brandeis, from Plato to Sissela Bok, and from Adam Smith to John Merrill deal with some of the most serious contemporary issues in journalism today. This short text also includes the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics and a full index.
Customer Reviews:
Essential Philosophy for Journalists and Media Watchdogs.......2004-06-21
This is a unique collection of writings and book excerpts providing a philosophical and ethical background for anyone interested in the ethics of journalism or the media system. These go as far back as Plato in ancient times, to the medieval musings on free speech by John Milton and Francis Bacon, which in turn started the press freedom concepts later brought to fruition by the likes of John Locke and "Cato," which are all presented here. The book proceeds to more modern examinations of the ethics and issues behind the press, including powerful submissions by media watchdogs such as Ben Bagdikian and A.J. Liebling. The book ends on a strong note with the prophetic but problematic findings of the 1947 Hutchings Commission and the rebuttal by John C. Merrill, which are strongly leftist and rightist respectively, and wrap up the modern realms of thought from all sides of the matter. The only problem with this volume is that some of the writings have been fragmented and edited due to space concerns, making some submissions difficult to follow (such as the essay by Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis). In the case of book excerpts such as these, the editors should have considered a more intensive review-style description of each book's main points. [~doomsdayer520~]
Books:
- The Little Book of Plagiarism
- The Moral Imperative of School Leadership
- The Police In America: An Introduction, with "Making the Grade" Student CD-ROM and PowerWeb
- The Possessive Investment in Whiteness: How White People Profit from Identity Politics
- The Power of Focus: How to Hit Your Business, Personal and Financial Targets with Absolute Certainty
- The Prince (Bantam Classics)
- The Reading Coach: A How-to Manual for Success
- Training to See: A Value Stream Mapping Workshop: A Value Stream Mapping Workshop (Lean Enterprise Institute)
- Understanding American and German Business Cultures
- Understanding Business
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- How to Use the Internet to Advertise, Promote and Market Your Business or Website with Little or No
- The Not So Big House: A Blueprint for the Way We Really Live
- Nazi Propaganda Films: A History and Filmography
- Out of Time: Designs for the Twentieth-Century Future
- The Celestine Prophecy
- Time to Run
- Staphylococcic
- International Financial Markets and the Firm
- Smart Globalization: Designing Global Strategies, Creating Global Networks
- The Empress of India: A Professor Moriarty Novel
WHAT LIBERAL MEDIA? THE TRUTH ABOUT BIAS AND THE NEWS.
The Boys on the Bus
Public Editor Number One: The Collected Columns (with Reflections, Reconsiderations, and Even a Few Retractions) of the First Ombudsman of The New York Times
The New Media Monopoly
The Problem of the Media: U.S. Communication Politics in the Twenty-First Century
