Janet Malcolm on journalism

Janet Mal­colm has some choice words about journ­al­ism in her exten­ded essay in the 3 May 2010 New Yorker.

Over the years, the social status and the edu­ca­tion level of journ­al­ists has risen and some journ­al­ists write extremely well. But the pro­fes­sion retains its trans­gress­ive­ness. Human frailty con­tin­ues to be the cur­rency in which it trades. Malice remains its anim­at­ing impulse. A trial offers unique oppor­tun­it­ies for journ­al­istic heart­less­ness. When the malig­nant, often libel­lous words of bat­tling attor­neys are lif­ted out of the heated con­text of the trial and set in cold type, a new, more exquis­ite tor­ture is suffered by the objects of their abuse — who now stands exposed to the world’s abuse.

Mal­colm loves the word trans­gress­ive by the way…it fea­tured in her New Yorker piece on Sylvia Plath: “the trans­gress­ive nature of bio­graphy is rarely acknow­ledged.” (Trans­gress­ive­ness is Malcolm’s coin­age, btw.)

Journ­al­ists request inter­views the way beg­gars ask for alms, reflex­ively and nervously. Like beg­gars, journ­al­ists must always be pre­pared for a rebuff, and can­not afford to let pride pre­vent them from mak­ing the pitch. But it isn’t pleas­ant for a grown man or woman to put him­self or her­self in the way of refusal. In my many years of doing journ­al­ism, I have never come to terms with this part of the work. I hate to ask. I hate it when they say no. And I love it when they say yes.

Read the whole thing, which fea­tures a bizarre attempt at inter­ven­tion by Mal­colm in the trial itself…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>