Staff and Writers,
As the editor, I've come across the resume of Stephen Glass.
After the truth came out about Glass at The National Republic, it is very
difficult to decide whether or not to hire him. The facts remain that he completely
or partially fabricated data on almost half of his articles while working at
the magazine. What is particularly troubling is that he fabricated his work
under two separate editors, so would I be just another? Even worse, he lied
about lying, and created new fabrications in order to try and cover his tracks.
But that was years ago…
Even if nearly half of his articles were tampered with, the
majority was legitimate. As an editor, I value quality writing, but above all I
need trust and truth. For me, the two are interchangeable, if you tell me the
truth, you've earned my trust. And if I trust you, I’ll believe that what you have
to say is the truth. But like me, his previous editors believed Glass, and it
tanked their magazine. Glass is full of talent, and with most writers, he can
only get better with the wisdom he’s picked up through the years. So whether or
not he would fabricate stories again is questionable.
I need to look at the principles if I want to get down to
the bottom of this. If I use Aristotle’s Golden mean, I would place one extreme
as shredding his resume, putting it in an envelope, and sending it back to him. The
other would be turning a blind eye to the facts and hire him on the spot. As a
middle-ground, I could maybe see myself hiring him, but with an intern or
photographer on his tail at every event. If I use Kant’s Categorical Imperative,
it gets trickier. If I were in his shoes, I’d want a universal law of having
the opportunity to prove myself to the world that it was the mistake of a
scared kid; I’d want a second shot. But fabricating a quote is different than over 20 articles… If I use Mill’s Principle of Utility, What would make the most
people happy? I’d love to have an excellent writer on my staff, he’d love to
have the job, but would my readers want to see a piece from a man who wrote
lies, lies read and believed even on the inflight magazine of Air Force One?
It was always evident
that Glass was an excellent writer, but as a journalist, his first loyalty
should have been to the truth, but he chose entertainment and the advancement
of his career first. As an editor, my loyalty is first and foremost to the
truth, then to my staff and writers. If I can’t trust that my writers are giving me the
truth in their stories, I can’t be loyal to them. And in this business, my ass
is on the line even more so than the writer’s. As terrible as it was that Glass’
career was ruined, it’s been ages since I’ve even heard the phrase “The
National Republic;” an entire magazine essentially reduced to rubble because of
one man, the man who now wants to work under me at my magazine.
It’s a shame he wasted all of that talent. He went all in, had
the winning hand, but pulled an ace from out of his sleeve anyway and got
caught. The facts are too strong, his loyalties too wrong, and regretfully, I’ll have to turn down Glass as a writer for our magazine.
No comments:
Post a Comment