NYT WTF?

Illustration of New York Times reporter with his hand over his face.

I got a weird email this morning…

Hi. read your article about working at the Natl. Enquirer: am working on a story that involves it and would love to get your advice. Do you have time for a phone call anytime today or tomorrow?

hope so.
best
Alessandra

Alessandra Stanley
New York Times
917 340 —-
212 556 —-

I’ve been interviewed a few times about my stint as a freelance copyeditor and designer at the trashy supermarket tabloids, which I wrote about in 2011 for The Huffington Post.

That’s because, irony of ironies, the staffers at the tabloids are forbidden from speaking to the media. Indeed, I’ve been banned from the place because I did exactly what they hound their sources to do: Reveal juicy details.

But I’ve never been asked for an interview the way Alessandra Stanley did – a 61-year-old veteran journalist. So I replied…

Alessandra:

At first, I thought your email was lame spam – the lack of capitalization, the weird abbreviation, the poor writing.

So I Googled you and found a Columbia Journalism Review article titled Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong.

I’m certainly not God’s gift to journalism, and you’re way up the food chain from me. But I’m seriously wondering if I should talk to you about working at the “Natl. Enquirer.”

I believe it’s hypocritical for journalists to reply “no comment,” so I’m open to persuasion. But I got to say, I volunteer as the newspaper adviser at a middling university you’ve never heard of – and if any of those student editors emailed an interview request like yours, I’d rip ’em a new one.

– Koretzky

An hour later, she replied…

Sorry you feel that way. Never mind.

Stunned, I shot back…

Alessandra:

Seriously? That’s it? You work at the freakin’ New York Times, and this is how you approach people for interviews?

– Koretzky

Not surprisingly, that’s the last I’ve heard from her. Here’s another irony…

The reporters I knew at the trashy supermarket tabloids do a much better job of treating the people they want to interview.

If this is how The New York Times reaches out to its potential sources, it’s no wonder the public thinks journalists are sloppy and arrogant.

When I was a cub reporter at the South Florida Sun Sentinel — a Top 50 daily newspaper but certainly no New York Times — an editor told me…

“You’re the face of this place. Most of our readers will never meet a Sun Sentinel employee. You’re it. Act unprofessionally, and they’re going to tell everyone, ‘I don’t like that newspaper, it stinks.'”

The New York Times certainly doesn’t stink. But this morning, it smells a tad off to me.

10Comments

Add yours

1

Hokey Pokey on Jun 16, 2016 at 1:49 pm
Reply

Thanks for writing this.

This reveals another reason I quit the industry. I got tired of working around colleagues who were putting in the least amount of effort required for them to: get the story, get a paycheck, and/or not lose their job. It bothered me immensely. I felt proud to hold a position as “journalist,” and put everything I had into it. Having to sit next to these types of journalists was upsetting.
2

Gail on Jun 16, 2016 at 2:51 pm
Reply

I dunno. I think she was being casual one journo to another. She was asking for advice from a fellow, not a formal interview. I think you were a bit hard on her.
3

koretzky on Jun 16, 2016 at 5:01 pm
Reply

Casual is fine. Sloppy is not. This is like meeting a first-time source with food in your teeth and your fly down – if nothing else, it’s unnecessarily distracting, and it takes only 15 seconds to fix.

And I assumed she wanted an interview. I’ve been quoted on this topic before. Not sure what “advice” I could give a veteran NYT critic.
4

Anonymous on Jun 16, 2016 at 5:30 pm
Reply

Private inquiry, public shaming. To what purpose but ego stroking and ‘I’m smarter than you so buzz off’. Forget Elements of Style…how about elements of class.
5

Nicole DeCriscio on Jun 16, 2016 at 6:04 pm
Reply

“Anonymous,” elements of class? Coming from someone who can’t or won’t attach their name to a comment? Smells a bit hypocritical to me.
6

Nick Fouriezos on Jun 17, 2016 at 7:50 am
Reply

Sounds like she’s more than a little bit shell-shocked. I would be too, if my errors had received that kind of CJR article, and that kind of attention over the years. Of course, I’d try to remedy that by not making those errors.

Still, no excuse for the flimsiest of interview requests. No matter how big or small, you’ve got to treat that source like you appreciate their insight and expertise. And that includes some basic courtesies, like introducing yourself, giving them an idea of what you’re writing about and politely asking if they’d have time for a talk. It would be one thing if she’d worked with you in the past on stories, and you had a casual relationship, but this is kinda gross.
7

Anonymous on Jun 17, 2016 at 9:44 pm
Reply

Anonymous is the moniker given to me by the site as I refused to sign up. I have enough unread mail in my folder and gave the comment in earnest. My name is Jim Anderson from NC. My comment was in passing from the facts given. You could have rebuked her with the same effect without the public shaming. It led me to believe the intent was to show the world how much better grasp you have on the language. Harsh, that’s all.
8

Larry Felton Johnson on Jun 18, 2016 at 5:53 pm
Reply

I don’t quite get the point, Koretzky. At my age I get requests for info and interviews based on past writing on a regular basis, and I either have time to help the reporter out with it or I don’t. They could send the request written in crayon in all caps by carrier pigeon, and as long as they’re fairly civil I give them my answer.

If I’m reading your initial response to her correctly, it sounds as though you presented yourself as an interview not worth the stress for the likely payoff. I might have handled it a bit differently, since I have alligator skin, but her response was within a range I find acceptable. She contacted you, you criticized the way she contacted you, and she presumably went elsewhere if she’s still pursuing the article.
9

Campy Freak on Jun 22, 2016 at 12:42 pm
Reply

Considering a simple request to talk with you turns into a salty blog post complete with non-relevant personal details, she probably made a really good call not contacting you again.
- 10
  
  koretzky on Jun 23, 2016 at 5:23 pm
  Reply
  
  What are the “non-relevant personal details”?