5 ms·

Is this bullying or just a misunderstanding? Is it normal or even possible for western journalists to let a source/interviewer dictate the final content of an

by xevb3k 8y ago

Is this bullying or just a misunderstanding? Is it normal or even possible for western journalists to let a source/interviewer dictate the final content of an article? I always assume that journalists can, and should, have freedom to write what they want as long as it’s true and accurate. If I say to a journalist something is “off-limits” I assume it means I’ll end the interview and not engage with them if they cover that topic. Not that I have a right to dictate what’s written in the free press. I’m honestly asking, I may just be misinformed. Can a source generally put limits on a journalist like this?

rovek 8y ago
If she were doing an interview with playboy you may expect them to dig into her love life and other such things but she is an engineer interviewing with motherboard.
- akqu 8y ago
  Have you read Vice? We can all argue who, if anyone, is right, but it certainly isn't unexpected that the twenty-something freelancers writing a puff piece about her weren't the shining example of professionalism. If they were she would probably have been a footnote, or uncomfortable in an entirely different way, as the article explores Chinese society.
ethanwillis 8y ago
What a journalist can do legally and what a journalist should do ethically are two different things. And talking about things that are conspiracy things on reddit.. yea not very uh.. high integrity? Not to mention they said that it was fine that these things would be off topic.
- xevb3k 8y ago
  Well the reddit allegations gained publicity because they were repeated by the editor of Make. I’d think it weird if Vice didn’t mention them, they were repeated and rebutted everywhere in the Maker community. In my view it’s unreasonable to expect them not to mention them. Unless you have an agreement that they will not be included in the final article. Not just vague wording about them being “off-limits” which I would assume would mean that we wouldn’t discuss them.
  - ethanwillis 8y ago
    Repeated by the editor of Make and then he went back on his repetition of those theories on it once he realized the B.S. wouldn't fly. Let's restate what the allegations were here.. for others who might not know. Essentially the allegations were that someone like Naomi couldn't possibly be a skilled maker and that she must have someone else making her creations. Nothing more than internet hearsay. Especially when she's willing to do maker stuff in front of anyone who's willing to show up. I don't think I've ever seen someone say "That guy surely didn't make that, his wife must have"
    - js8 8y ago
      "I don't think I've ever seen someone say "That guy surely didn't make that, his wife must have"" While I completely agree with the context of your remark, there have been people who suggested that the original author of theory of relativity was in fact Einstein's wife Mileva Maric.
      - ethanwillis 8y ago
        Touche lol. It was super early in the morning when I wrote that line. I actually did know that in the back of my mind.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
m4x 8y ago
Vice have just demonstrated how practical it is for a source to control what and how things are reported. However, if reporters want continued access to interesting sources then they should respect their wishes - particularly when it's for safety reasons. Anything less is scummy
pulisse 8y ago
> I always assume that journalists can, and should, have freedom to write what they want as long as it’s true and accurate. If I say to a journalist something is “off-limits” I assume it means I’ll end the interview and not engage with them if they cover that topic. Not that I have a right to dictate what’s written in the free press. > I’m honestly asking, I may just be misinformed. Can a source generally put limits on a journalist like this? Your impression of the relevant journalistic standard is accurate, but this case has some unusual features that mean evaluation has to go beyond what you point out. A subject can dictate the terms of an interview, but they don't have say over what the final piece looks like. If journalists made that concession to people they interviewed it would significantly erode the informational value of what they write, so this is a bright line according to journalistic professional ethics (at least in the Anglophone world, which is what I'm familiar with). And this is part of Jeong's defense of Koebler: He wasn't under any obligation to publish an article that Wu would have liked. But. In this case, the controversial claims about Wu were nonsense motivated by some pretty rank misogyny. In addition, Wu is working in a cultural context where such claims, when publicized, can materially affect her livelihood; worse, the politics of mainland China are such that they can put her in actual danger. (Another part of Jeong's defense of Koebler is that the harm Wu alleges isn't real; there Jeong seems on much weaker ground.) So it was a terrible judgment call on Vice's part to publish the piece that they did. I actually doubt they had any awareness of the consequences publishing that article could have, but their lack of consideration of that is itself a professional lapse when reporting cross-culturally. The bottom line is that Vice deserves opprobrium here, but not because they violated an agreement with Wu.
- xevb3k 8y ago
  That’s really interesting, thanks for providing some context!
- unityByFreedom 8y ago
  > the politics of mainland China are such that they [the claims] can put her in actual danger. Claims that her husband did her work for her could put her in danger from the Chinese government? I doubt it. Her livelihood is at more risk from becoming unpopular than being jailed. I can understand these rumors are embarrassing and she wants to push back against them. Perhaps she feels saying "the government may jail me" as a defense is an effective way to dictate what a journalist writes. It certainly works for China on its population. But, she's not a dissident discussing Tiananmen Square, and she's not sharing Winnie the Pooh cartoons. She's a highly followed online persona, a 21st century Hollywood star, and is sensitive to anything that could make her look bad. That's much easier to understand than the Chinese government being worried about her marriage or spouse's work.
MaysonL 8y ago
When a journal agrees to terms of an interview before it takes place, they have an ethical obligation to follow through. If they break the agreement, they're shit.
smsm42 8y ago
> Is it normal or even possible for western journalists to let a source/interviewer dictate the final content of an article? Not possible, but when journalists court the source, they often make promises they know they'd never deliver on (not that they are unique in this, aren't they?) They may promise to leave certain things off-the-record, or omit certain parts, and then decide - or have higher-ups decide, or make it look like higher-ups decided, whatever - that this is too juicy and click-worthy material to hide it, and violate all promises. It is very rare for any negative consequences besides source being pissed off to come from it, and the source is already used up, so who cares? > Can a source generally put limits on a journalist like this? Essentially, no, but journalists often make it look like they can.

by xevb3k 8y ago

rovek 8y ago

If she were doing an interview with playboy you may expect them to dig into her love life and other such things but she is an engineer interviewing with motherboard.

akqu 8y ago
Have you read Vice? We can all argue who, if anyone, is right, but it certainly isn't unexpected that the twenty-something freelancers writing a puff piece about her weren't the shining example of professionalism. If they were she would probably have been a footnote, or uncomfortable in an entirely different way, as the article explores Chinese society.

ethanwillis 8y ago

What a journalist can do legally and what a journalist should do ethically are two different things. And talking about things that are conspiracy things on reddit.. yea not very uh.. high integrity? Not to mention they said that it was fine that these things would be off topic.

xevb3k 8y ago
Well the reddit allegations gained publicity because they were repeated by the editor of Make. I’d think it weird if Vice didn’t mention them, they were repeated and rebutted everywhere in the Maker community. In my view it’s unreasonable to expect them not to mention them. Unless you have an agreement that they will not be included in the final article. Not just vague wording about them being “off-limits” which I would assume would mean that we wouldn’t discuss them.
- ethanwillis 8y ago
  Repeated by the editor of Make and then he went back on his repetition of those theories on it once he realized the B.S. wouldn't fly. Let's restate what the allegations were here.. for others who might not know. Essentially the allegations were that someone like Naomi couldn't possibly be a skilled maker and that she must have someone else making her creations. Nothing more than internet hearsay. Especially when she's willing to do maker stuff in front of anyone who's willing to show up. I don't think I've ever seen someone say "That guy surely didn't make that, his wife must have"
  - js8 8y ago
    "I don't think I've ever seen someone say "That guy surely didn't make that, his wife must have"" While I completely agree with the context of your remark, there have been people who suggested that the original author of theory of relativity was in fact Einstein's wife Mileva Maric.
    - ethanwillis 8y ago
      Touche lol. It was super early in the morning when I wrote that line. I actually did know that in the back of my mind.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

m4x 8y ago

Vice have just demonstrated how practical it is for a source to control what and how things are reported. However, if reporters want continued access to interesting sources then they should respect their wishes - particularly when it's for safety reasons. Anything less is scummy

pulisse 8y ago

> I always assume that journalists can, and should, have freedom to write what they want as long as it’s true and accurate. If I say to a journalist something is “off-limits” I assume it means I’ll end the interview and not engage with them if they cover that topic. Not that I have a right to dictate what’s written in the free press. > I’m honestly asking, I may just be misinformed. Can a source generally put limits on a journalist like this? Your impression of the relevant journalistic standard is accurate, but this case has some unusual features that mean evaluation has to go beyond what you point out. A subject can dictate the terms of an interview, but they don't have say over what the final piece looks like. If journalists made that concession to people they interviewed it would significantly erode the informational value of what they write, so this is a bright line according to journalistic professional ethics (at least in the Anglophone world, which is what I'm familiar with). And this is part of Jeong's defense of Koebler: He wasn't under any obligation to publish an article that Wu would have liked. But. In this case, the controversial claims about Wu were nonsense motivated by some pretty rank misogyny. In addition, Wu is working in a cultural context where such claims, when publicized, can materially affect her livelihood; worse, the politics of mainland China are such that they can put her in actual danger. (Another part of Jeong's defense of Koebler is that the harm Wu alleges isn't real; there Jeong seems on much weaker ground.) So it was a terrible judgment call on Vice's part to publish the piece that they did. I actually doubt they had any awareness of the consequences publishing that article could have, but their lack of consideration of that is itself a professional lapse when reporting cross-culturally. The bottom line is that Vice deserves opprobrium here, but not because they violated an agreement with Wu.

xevb3k 8y ago
That’s really interesting, thanks for providing some context!
unityByFreedom 8y ago
> the politics of mainland China are such that they [the claims] can put her in actual danger. Claims that her husband did her work for her could put her in danger from the Chinese government? I doubt it. Her livelihood is at more risk from becoming unpopular than being jailed. I can understand these rumors are embarrassing and she wants to push back against them. Perhaps she feels saying "the government may jail me" as a defense is an effective way to dictate what a journalist writes. It certainly works for China on its population. But, she's not a dissident discussing Tiananmen Square, and she's not sharing Winnie the Pooh cartoons. She's a highly followed online persona, a 21st century Hollywood star, and is sensitive to anything that could make her look bad. That's much easier to understand than the Chinese government being worried about her marriage or spouse's work.

MaysonL 8y ago

When a journal agrees to terms of an interview before it takes place, they have an ethical obligation to follow through. If they break the agreement, they're shit.

smsm42 8y ago

> Is it normal or even possible for western journalists to let a source/interviewer dictate the final content of an article? Not possible, but when journalists court the source, they often make promises they know they'd never deliver on (not that they are unique in this, aren't they?) They may promise to leave certain things off-the-record, or omit certain parts, and then decide - or have higher-ups decide, or make it look like higher-ups decided, whatever - that this is too juicy and click-worthy material to hide it, and violate all promises. It is very rare for any negative consequences besides source being pissed off to come from it, and the source is already used up, so who cares? > Can a source generally put limits on a journalist like this? Essentially, no, but journalists often make it look like they can.