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.
No comments:
Post a Comment