By now, you all have probably heard about Sarah Lewitinn and her Village Voice cover. We have no comment about "Ultragrrrl," either her personally or the manner in which she conducts business, but instead would like to shed light on the rebuttle that Chris Ott wrote in the article's comment section.“The Village Voice is not a blog, and cannot be wielded so carelessly, or treated as a brand. Its history and still-vast readership stipulate strict observance of and adherence to journalistic ethics.”
We agree with Ott that a piece pretending to be by an outside journalist when in actuality, it is fawning review written by a friend is unethical, especially when it is written for a major publication such as the Village Voice. It is one thing to read an interview conducted by a peer or a colleague, as in Interview Magazine for example, but Tricia Romano’s “In Defense of Ultragrrrl” never states to be so and in the process, dupes readers who do not know their connection. This was also the case when Marc Spitz wrote his sycophantic work in Vanity Fair entitled “Grrrls Got Rhythm,” an article in which Spitz tells the audience that he was once co-workers, not long-time friends, with Sarah.
We know Sarah to be a very nice girl, but question what loyalty she must inspire that convinces writers, and their editors, to allow for such pieces to be published. The Village Voice has always been a newspaper that New York City has looked to for unbiased, intelligent, and sometimes outrageous articles. The paper began in 1955 and has since gone on to cultivate a reputation for covering alternative stories from uncovering political scandals to reviewing the latest underground dance craze. It has won three Pulitzer prizes and has seen the likes of E.E. Cummings, Allen Ginsberg and Tom Stoppard all pass through its pages. We fear that since the New Times Media buyout in 2005, the Village Voice is becoming more and more, a sell-out. Or perhaps what is more likely, dangerously careless in its editorial process.
0 comments:
Post a Comment