Reply to Bad Art Friend

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Bad Art Friend"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I don't know the Corker letter proves what people say it proves.  If I were a writer trying to get someone to talk to me, or a detective trying to get a murderer to talk to me, I would try to see the story from their point of view and explain as well as I could how I found their POV relatable.  Even if maybe I didn't, completely.  Corker had already been working on the story for a while with material only provided from Dorland, so he had to know that Larsen would need a reason to be persuaded about how he wasn't already biased against her.  So he gave her that.

I don't feel one way or the other about who Corker really sided with or what he was trying to do when he wrote the article.  But the only way he was going to get Larsen to talk to him is if her persuaded her that her point of view would be represented in the story, and that he was a good person to articulate what the POV was.[/quote]

Hmm, disagree. Journalists are supposed to be neutral, and he should have gone into the story without an agenda - yet he stated it. Therefore anything he found that refuted that he couldn't well use because then she could (rightfully) claim he'd duped her. There's absolutely no reason he couldn't have said: "Hey Sonia, Dawn pitched us about your legal entanglements. I'm going to write a feature about it for the NYTimes. I would love to have your input to get the full story and represent both sides...." Then, tack on the line he actually wrote "As I hope you'll see from my other work, I do not come into stories as a judge and jury." Honestly, if she didn't participate, he could have written the story about Dawn, but that wasn't his angle. He even said he wanted people to "experience it" what she (only Sonia) went through. [/quote]

Eh, no, because that's not how he wrote it, is it?  If he were really going to write it from the perspective of what Sonya went through, he would have shown from the beginning how she took Dawn's Facebook post and used it in her story thinking it was harmless because Art, and joked around with the monkeys via text.  He clearly didn't provide Sonya's viewpoint throughout -- which is why we do not identify with her.  But he did explain that he wanted to portray what she went through in her fight for authorship of her story, which he legitimately did attempt to explain.

I'm not a journalist (and suspect that you aren't either), but I do note that this is in New York Magazine and not the New York Times news pages and that this is more of a deep dive by way of think piece and less of a Watergate expose.  I think there is probably some leeway to writers in how they reach out to members of the public to get them to participate in their stories, but writers/journalists please correct me if I'm wrong.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics