|
Loading... The Journalist and the Murderer (1990)by Janet Malcolm
None.  amerynth | Feb 15, 2013 |  An interesting look at the subject-reporter relationship inherent in any journalistic investigation. Malcolm focuses specifically on the problems and issues present in the case of MacDonald v. McGinnis. MacDonald, convicted of murdering his pregnant wife and two daughters, did not like the way he was portrayed in McGinnis’ book, Fatal Vision, where the reporter claimed the man was guilty of the crime. The problem was, McGinnis was given exclusive access to MacDonald during his criminal trial (he was even made a member of the defense team) and subsequent incarceration (he wrote MacDonald numerous letters stating he believed him to be innocent). The question at the heart of the matter: is it fine for a journalist to lie or deceive to achieve his means (namely, greater or continued access to material / the subject) for completion of his investigation? Malcolm says, essentially, yes — though certainly not to the extent McGinnis went. Moreover, Malcolm recognizes that this is a problem most people have a hard time admitting, much less understanding. Still, she claims there is always a certain amount of interpretation necessary on the part of the journalist, to turn a strictly factual account into a piece of journalism. "Texts … derived from a tape—however well edited the transcript may be—tend to retain some trace of their origin (almost a kind of metallic flavor) and lack the atmosphere of truthfulness present in a work where it is the writer’s own ear that has caught the drift of the subject’s thought." Malcolm’s conclusion: "The moral ambiguity of journalism lies not in its texts but in the relationships out of which they arise—relationships that are invariably and inescapably lopsided." http://lebookshelf.tumblr.com/post/6475715089/65-the-journalist-and-the-murderer... (  ) the_bookshelf | Jun 13, 2011 | This was a fascinating book, in its review of the Jeffrey McDonald case, as the facts were "known" at different stages in time, and about the ethical issues inherent in various aspects of journalism. I'm sure it must be used as a textbook in journalism classes even now, 20 years after publication. (Being 20 years later, I could find out, but due to congenital laziness, will only surmise!) The comparison of the actual and edited - without attribution - quotations which the author discusses in the epilogue would in itself be worth a class of discussion. Absolutely interesting and worthwhile reading. (  ) cherilove | May 9, 2010 | no reviews | add a review
Amazon.com Product Description (ISBN 0679731830, Paperback)In two previous books, Janet Malcolm explored the hidden sides of, respectively, institutional psychoanalysis and Freudian biography. In this book, she examines the psychopathology of journalism. Using a strange and unprecedented lawsuit as her larger-than-life example -- the lawsuit of Jeffrey MacDonald, a convicted murderer, against Joe McGinniss, the author of Fatal Vision, a book about the crime -- she delves into the always uneasy, sometimes tragic relationship that exists between journalist and subject. In Malcolm's view, neither journalist nor subject can avoid the moral impasse that is built into the journalistic situation. When the text first appeared, as a two-part article in The New Yorker, its thesis seemed so radical and its irony so pitiless that journalists across the country reacted as if stung.Her book is a work of journalism as well as an essay on journalism: it at once exemplifies and dissects its subject. In her interviews with the leading and subsidiary characters in the MacDonald-McGinniss case -- the principals, their lawyers, the members of the jury, and the various persons who testified as expert witnesses at the trial -- Malcolm is always aware of herself as a player in a game that, as she points out, she cannot lose. The journalist-subject encounter has always troubled journalists, but never before has it been looked at so unflinchingly and so ruefully. Hovering over the narrative -- and always on the edge of the reader's consciousness -- is the MacDonald murder case itself, which imparts to the book an atmosphere of anxiety and uncanniness. The Journalist and the Murderer derives from and reflects many of the dominant intellectual concerns of our time, and it will have a particular appeal for those who cherish the odd, the off-center, and the unsolved. (retrieved from Amazon Thu, 14 Feb 2013 13:56:35 -0500) Explores the relationship between journalists and their subjects, and the question of journalistic ethics, using the lawsuit of convicted murderer Jeffrey MacDonald against author Joe McGinniss, as a case study. |
 Google Books — Loading...Popular coversRatingAverage: (3.8)
Is this you?Become a LibraryThing Author. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wikipedia in English (1)
1
The book is the examination of a lawsuit brought by a convicted murderer against an author who wrote a book about his case, who basically lied about the tone his book would take. Interesting five out of six jurors found in the murderer's favor, which certainly says a lot about the state of journalism these days.
While I very much agreed with Malcolm's premise that aspects of journalism are morally indefensible, the author she writes about seemed to really cross the line into stunningly unethical behavior in the name of a dollar.
My problem with the book was that it got sort of repetitive after a while. I felt like Malcolm had enough material for a good magazine article, but not quite enough for a book. (