(via keepinganotebook)
Interesting blog post by Emily Gould, about backstabbing in the NYC media scene. I share some of Emily’s concerns about what we let slip out from our keyboards online, and undoubtedly would feel the same betrayal if I were in her shoes, but…
One of the reasons journalists technically aren’t supposed to write about people they know is because it’s thought to influence their coverage. In practice, this isn’t so easy, because if you spend long enough writing and thinking about any beat or scene, you’re going to get to know the people in it, but the principle remains the same: write the truth (whether it’s the fact of what happened, or the truth of your opinion), regardless of your personal feelings about the person involved. Hence this quote, and hence writing frequently involving betrayal.
Rachel Sklar’s job is to write about the media, good and bad. Jessica Coen and Chris Rovzar are employed to write about New York, good and bad. They can like Emily perfectly well and still not like everything she writes and does. She falls within their beat, and they’re obliged to write about it honestly.
Emily Gould’s job at Gawker was similar: to write about the New York media scene… mostly bad. She’s not ethically comfortable with that anymore, and that’s perfectly understandable. Probably noble, even. But her writing, just like anyone else’s, is still going to involve stepping on some toes (think how she characterised her relationship with Julia Allison in the NYT piece, for one) if it’s going to be honest, and if it’s going to be any good.
I’m working on a story for the August Walkley mag (for non-Aussies, the Australian industry publication for media professionals) looking at changing notions of private and public life and how they’re impacting journalists.
I’m interested in a few things:
1. How have your online activities (through blogging, social networking and so on) impacted your professional life, in either positive or negative ways?
2. How do you decide what to share and what to keep to yourself online?
3. Why do/don’t you share of yourself online?
4. How is the move towards public personas/brands changing the actual and perceived role of journalists?
Reblog or email me (rachel dot hills at gmail dot com) if you’re interested in contributing.
Almost 21, actually.
He’s 18, right?
“I am a straight woman, and I am confident about my appearance and happy with my body.”
I’m curious to see if Tumblr women have better or worse self-images than the average American woman.
Like most women, I would imagine, whether this statement applies to me changes from day to day. Some days I think I look lovely, others I think I look dreadful. Some parts of my body I like more than others, so on and so forth.
…Internet activism is individualistic. It’s great for a sense of interconnectedness, but the Internet does not bind individuals in shared struggle the same as the face-to-face activism of the 1960s and ’70s did. It allows us to channel our individual power for good, but it stops there.
This is great for signing a petition to Congress or donating to a cause. But the real challenges in our society – the growing gap between rich and poor, the intransigence of racism and discrimination, the abuses from Iraq to Burma (Myanmar) – won’t politely go away with a few clicks of a mouse. Or even a million.
Millennials are poised to lead us all to reject the hyperindividualism and isolation that has dominated our recent past and recognize the deep interconnectedness and mutual responsibility that is our present and future. The lone cowboy story was a myth. Our greatest accomplishments, as individuals and as a nation, have almost always come from hitching our wagons to others and working together, not just in going it alone.
To avoid eroding the values Millennials so appreciate, and to truly influence the world around them, they must transform their online activism into off-line communities and build an effective movement for change. From church basements to campus meetings to voters’ doors, Millennials need to add face-to-face action to their innate sense of community.
“Friend of Bono”. I love it.
Lefty think tanks Essential Action and the Institute for Policy Studies have a new study out titled “High Flyers: How Private Jet Travel is Straining the System, Warming the Planet and Costing You Money.” It implies some not-so-nice things about jet owners and Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin — even if they are left-leaning, Prius-driving friends of Bono.
I have an article in the Australian Literary Review today. The above is what they titled it.
Just to be clear, I do not pose this question in the review.
