The Journalist and the Murderer revisited: What interviews with journalism subjects reveal about a modern classic

Abstract

Do journalism subjects invariably feel betrayed and misrepresented by journalists, as Janet Malcolm claims in her seminal 1990 book The Journalist and the Murderer? If not, what explains the ongoing appeal of her now famous conclusion? Based on interviews with 83 people who were named in newspapers in the New York City–area and a southwestern city, this article takes up these questions by putting journalism subjects’ own descriptions of their experiences with the journalistic process in dialogue with Malcolm’s central argument. I conclude that Malcolm’s conman–victim model for the journalist–subject relationship fails, in some key ways, to describe journalism subjects’ experiences; and yet, Malcolm does capture important emotional truths at the heart of the journalist–subject encounter. In the end, the hyperbolic versions of the journalist and subject she portrays may continue to resonate not because they are strictly accurate, but because they play a role in journalistic boundary work, simultaneously probing and reinforcing the boundaries of acceptable journalistic practice.

An Intersectional Analysis of U.S. Journalists’ Experiences With Hostile Sources

“…This research does not, however, attempt to explore the interactions between journalist and source during news interviews. Palmer (2017) sought to understand the by-product of this interaction in a study of 83 "ordinary" people who had been quoted in the news. Regardless of whether they were pleased with the experience or the final product, sources shared one common belief: that journalists exploited them for their stories (Palmer, 2017).…”

“…Palmer (2017) sought to understand the by-product of this interaction in a study of 83 “ordinary” people who had been quoted in the news. Regardless of whether they were pleased with the experience or the final product, sources shared one common belief: that journalists exploited them for their stories (Palmer, 2017). While reporters might believe that journalism is necessary for democracy and they seek to share subjects’ stories for the good of public knowledge (Tuchman, 2010), subjects were keenly aware that the journalists with whom they interacted seemingly “had self-servingly taken their stories to profit from them” (Palmer, 2017, p. 585).…”

Willing but wary: Australian women experts’ attitudes to engaging with the news media

“…A few other studies have sought input from ordinary people who have appeared in the news. Overall, research about the source-journalist relationship indicates that it is complicated, and often includes positive and negative aspects (Besley and Nisbet, 2013; Palmer, 2017; Walsh-Childers et al, 2011).…”

“…A different kind of relationship tends to exist between journalists and the ‘ordinary’ people who appear in the news and may only have one contact with a journalist in their life. They do not perceive the same power play in their interactions with journalists, but they do generally consider their interactions with reporters to be mutually beneficial (Palmer, 2017). Appearing in the news was linked to increased status and was likened to ‘receiving an award’ (Palmer, 2017: 582).…”

Changing objective: Re-examining The Journalist and the Murderer

“…27 Ruth Palmer recently explored Malcolm's arguments, using interviews with 83 subjects who were interviewed and named in newspaper stories to find whether they felt afterward that they were betrayed and misrepresented. 28 Palmer found "the feeling of being exploited was more common than the feeling of being betrayed." She concluded by modifying Malcolm's analysis anew, suggesting that "anxiety about being taken in and manipulated by subjects pervades the profession; better to be the seducer than the seduced."…”