Magazines

Carter as nasty, mutating germ*

The New York Observer editorializes today against its former editor, Vanity Fair editor Graydon Carter, disagreeing with the notion that his ethical lapses in Hollywood are minor:

The star-struck bon vivant editor of Vanity Fair magazine, has crossed a line that no journalist can afford to cross, and few would dream of crossing. As has been recently reported, Mr. Carter has been taking money from the movie people his magazine covers in its pages—thereby severing the relationship of trust that any reputable magazine or newspaper must keep with its readers. The moment Mr. Carter accepted a $100,000 payment from Universal Pictures—money he received in return for suggesting that the book A Beautiful Mind be made into a movie—Vanity Fair as an institution threw in the towel on its claims to journalistic ethics.

The writer of the paper's "Off the Record" column, however, was less than wowed by the Carter revelations that ran Friday in the L.A. Times and NYT. The column says the LAT is "still aggressively chasing leads" but speculates that Carter will elude the hits.

Last Friday’s twin accounts of Mr. Carter’s $100,000 deal, which included confirmation from Condé Nast, read more like the product of a rush to get a solid fact into the paper than as finished indictments...the quasi-exposés hardly gave incentive for future whistle-blowers. Why join the infantry charge if the leaders are carrying small-caliber weapons?

Condé Nast was, and remains, unfazed...Celebrities, it turns out, are as adaptable as staphylococci: The more shaming they take, the more shameless they can become. The larger-than-life Mr. Carter has survived being called a hack and a buffoon. Perhaps he can survive being called a crook.

* Add film critic Henry Sheehan to the list of those who feel, yes, it is a big deal if the editor of Vanity Fair took $100,000 from Hollywood for doing nothing. Sheehan: "Of all the untrustworthy attitudes (cool, fashionable, radical, etc.), that one can affect, the most self-destructive and false is cynicism...One can’t trust a businessman who raids the larder to pay off an editor and one can’t trust an editor who accepts, or requests, the money." (And there's a nice mention there of L.A. Observed as well.)

Also in the Observer: Los Angeles writer Marc Weingarten reviews How to Change the World: Social Entrepreneurs and the Power of New Ideas, by David Bornstein.


More by Kevin Roderick:
Standing up to Harvey Weinstein
The Media
LA Times gets a top editor with nothing but questions
LA Observed Notes: Harvey Weinstein stripped bare
LA Observed Notes: Photos of the homeless, photos that found homes
Recent Magazines stories on LA Observed:
Mary Melton exits as Los Angeles Magazine sold
Media notes: Nikki Finke going to Harvard, local Ellies and more
Janice Min leaving THR, Matthew Belloni upped
Read the LA Times response to Los Angeles Magazine's piece
LA Magazine says editor Davan Maharaj is what's wrong with the LA Times*
Brian Lowry to CNN and more media notes
How TMZ and Harvey Levin get the dirt
LA's breast fixation and more greatest hits from Los Angeles Mag
Previous story: Garcetti's diary, day 2

Next story: Seipp on Carroll *


 

LA Observed on Twitter