It was every journalist dream to write and let their writings be one great reading. The ambition of being the best always tempt people to commit mistakes they themselves couldn't believe they can do. Being a journalist, as one of my dreams, I knew though I haven't been there the weight of responsibility of the job. I can simply say that yah, Steve is too young thats why he was able to fabricate or made his own stories. But its not always like that, we just all have our own ways of getting things done in the easiest and fastest way we can. Steve, I guess he don't really get the privilege he has that moment when he was still writing for the New Republic. As a young journalist I do believe that he was really a good journalist to achieve the position. I was really wondering how his fabricated stories pass all the fact check, editors and publishers. To think that their process was very strict and critical. He was really good for coming up those fabricated stories. Considering the pressure around him, his family wants him to take law school, at the same time his reputation in having the humorous and best story each time they conduct meetings with the editor.
Michael Kelly is the first editor of Steve. I guess he already doubted the works of Steve but let it be. As his editor Steve was very loyal to him because he just take all the words of Steve, which I found not so professional. As a editor yah you should stand beside your writer but there is a duty to know the truth, and that was what Chuck did. I was very sympathetic to Chuck from start to finish. Seeing him as the supposed antagonist but I knew he is not. He did his job, separated personal issues in the office, stay always calm in dealing with Steve and all his troubles. Thats a good editor for me, the one who thinks for the reputation and image of the magazine. He did his all to know the truth, I know he is in Steve's side, he just want to prove the credibility of story and end up discovering the facts.
As for the online magazine who discovers the alarming article. They did a journalistic act. It became a battle of journalist to journalist. The one as critic and the other as a writer. And even when Chuck call their editor to make a request not to publish their story they stand to be a real journalist who speaks the truth aside from the fact that the issue was a breakthrough favorable to them.
The film illustrated the other side of every journalist. Them, being a friend to co-journalist that they tolerated the act of misconduct, being a journalist who's thirsty to catch a story, being an editor who wants the truth to protect his writer.
I guess if only Steve knew to admit his mistake from the very start, Chuck might just suspend him. Steve became so smart to manipulate things, to fabricate his stories. Its one major thing that a journalist must not do.