| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Media Issues > Topic: Reporter's Catch 22: Ed Ghost-writes, Fabricates |
Topic: Reporter's Catch 22: Ed Ghost-writes, Fabricates
| Author | Message |
| Redacted2008 | Posted – 4/26/2008 3:54:38 AM | show profile | email poster A friend who is a reporter at a mid-sized publication is in a tight situation and doesn't know what to do. This friend's editor is using the friend's byline to prove the editor's personal theses to attack various targets and as a forum for the editor's own writing. When this friend files stories what is published often does not even resemble the story the friend filed and includes fabrications i.e. thoughts written in the 1st person that the friend never had. The first time this happened, this friend, shocked, tried arguing, but was talked down by the editor who has a knack for turning arguments around and making the accuser feel guilt or rather something that mimics it and is closer to feel. This editor often has the reporter report a story file the notes and then the editor writes the story. When the reporter requests that his or her credit consist of "Additional reporting by" - the editor talks reporter down -- so there is the reporter's byline with said copy. |
| Redacted2008 | Posted – 4/26/2008 4:01:47 AM | show profile | email poster (continued) These articles are often, are usually about topics that don't even remotely interest the reporter, but interest guess who, and contain guess who's thesis of course proven right on the page. They are snarky, even mean-spirited at times. But because this reporter tends to avoid unnecessary conflict and is cowed by the general negativity that this editor exudes throughout the office, this reporter keeps his mouth shut, his morale and motivation and productivity dropping and dropping and dropping. This reporter gets a job lead and is thrilled to hand his application materials to prospective employer's HR people through a contact. He is told by the contact to expect a call in a week or so. This period passes. Nothing. It occurs to the reporter that whatever the prospective employer thought of the reporter's clips and resume that HR has Googled the reporter's name and has found backlash against the articles that were doctored against reporter's will (even if he has acquiesced to editor's 'requests') -- and so this reporter is growing in reputation as a petty, passive aggressive, instigator who wants to call attention to him or herself by writing shallow, provocative, well-written (from a purely technical standpoint) articles. |
| Redacted2008 | Posted – 4/26/2008 4:09:34 AM | show profile | email poster (continued) This pattern does not change. The reporter's frustration continues. He or she is not in love with his or her words, but knows the difference between being told to do rewrites, or having the editor rearrange paragraphs and correct typos, or cut a graf or two -- and having his or her piece completely gutted by the editor, and at times having this happen when he or she has taken on the editor's thesis and written it with this in mind whether he or she agrees with editor's thesis or even cares about the question it purports to answer. The reporter's quandary, besides dealing with an increasing lack of confidence in his or her writing ability, is his or her lack of recourse. This reporter can throw a shit-fit, but that will result in being fired and this reporter already has gaps on his or her resume, some resulting from early post-college firings. (This reporter is much more mature and professional now.) This reporter has all sorts of expenses including tens of thousands of dollars of college debt for a school with a fancy name that isn't worth repeating for its negligible fruits. This reporter CANNOT be fired. This reporter also needs health insurance for medication and the slight chance that his or her mind will drift while crossing the street and his or her ankle will be crushed under hypothetical whitewall goodyear. This reporter also cannot stay at organization, cannot stay at this organization and allow the appropriation of his work to continue so that the editor can further the editor's careers and lash out at his or her perceived rivals from behind a computer screen. |
| Redacted2008 | Posted – 4/26/2008 4:20:29 AM | show profile | email poster (continued) This reporter needs a fresh start and sends resumes out all over the place and rarely if ever hears a thing. So far this reporter has heard nothing from any employer who is offering a position in journalism. This reporter was excited when his or her career started to take off (relatively speaking), but this reporter realizes that it may be over before it has begun. In fact, he or she realizes that it may affect his or her entire career prospects, whether in journalism or seismography or police work or bathroom attendancy, because a simple Google search will yield the reporter's doppelganger, which is really an incarnation of the editor. And the editor is able to pretend to be nice in order to submit the reporter to going along with his petty schemes before recinding his illusory benevolence. If the reporter stays - he or she is fucked. If the reporter leaves without a job waiting he or she is fucked because he or she does not come from money, and more importantly his or her reputation among prospective employers is in a limbo that he or she suspects is causing him or her to lose sleep. This reporter does not consider himself or herself perfect. He or she does not consider himself or herself to be one of the great writers of his or her generation. However, where he or she once had hope of finding a comfortable place to do what he or she identified as a child as his or her passion, he or she is not so sure anymore. Unlike his or her editor, being celebrated by the New York media elite and/or the city's literati is not a concern of this reporter's. Being respected by them is, if only because they hold the undeniable power to blacklist him or her if they so choose. It may not be AIDS or terrorism or coastal erosion or famine, the reporter, my friend, knows this. But it sure is one hell of a dilemma and he or she is pretty confused. |
| eriksherman | Posted – 4/26/2008 7:26:56 AM | show profile | email poster Your friend needs to develop a spine. I understand the need for healthcare insurance and an income, but there are always jobs of various types, even ones that involve writing, and so long as the person stays in a place that endangers future career and creates misery, it is living the life of a slave, and I can't think of anything really worse than that. It's the writer going along with the editor that enables the current situation. So let the writer not go along with the editor. Perhaps the smart thing would be to get a job in PR or corporate writing for a while and do some freelance work on the side to build so more representative clips. Then, when approaching a potential new employer, lay out all the cards on the table, and send the "real" clips. In any case, one way or the other, your friend should take a stand and stop enabling the entire situation. ------ Free writer resources: http://www.eriksherman.com/WriterBiz |
| chucho | Posted – 4/26/2008 11:02:31 AM | show profile There's way to much info here, but it sounds like: #1.) The reporter needs to insist that the editor attribute him or her appropriately. Is s/h's a stringer (providing notes rather than whole articles) than s/he should insist on not getting a byline. #2.) If the reporter is serious about being a reporter s/he should have ended this relationship immediately because if you are characterizing the editor's stories correctly then they are not articles this person would want to be associated with as a journalist. If they're going online, the damage is already done. All future editors will see these editorial assassinations and attribute them to the author of the articles. I would immediately insist on bylines being removed online at the least. But even that doesn't remove the cached pages -- though most editors don't dig that deeply into reporters' backgrounds as to check the cached pages on Google. In other words: what goes online is in most cases there forever. #3.) If this writer needs to continue this working relationship -- out of need for money, clips or both -- then s/he needs to assert more authority over the content that is being attributed to him or her. This reporter should be assertive in this regard and cease working with this editor if the editor insists on using his or her name for stories s/he did not write. Editors in general should not rearrange or add content to articles without the writer whose name is going on the article being able to review, accept or reject said additions. Editing (rearranging paragraphs, making cuts, editing for style and grammar) content is one thing. Adding content to a report is an entirely other thing. Every reporter has a right to review additions to articles before publication. This is a caustic situation. Adding stuff to reporters copy without discussing the additions and getting the reporter to agree to them can irreparably poison the editor-writer relationship. |
| chucho | Posted – 4/26/2008 11:05:30 AM | show profile Oops: I mean: I think it's OK for editors to rearrange paragraphs (like moving a quote higher in the story); sometimes there isn't time to OK these moves with the writer. The issue gets more complicated if editors add anything to stories, which in most (but not all) cases is uncalled for. Reporters must be part of anything that involves adding text to articles that bear their names. |
| snappiness | Posted – 4/26/2008 11:21:46 AM | show profile I completely agree with the first response, "this reporter" needs to develop "his or her" backbone. I'm guessing it's you. Stand up for your work and go down swinging. You're letting this happen to you. No writer should ever let someone else put ideas under their byline, that's sacrilegious and no amount of health insurance is worth compromising your integrity and ruining your career, because that's what's happening. |
