1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why the Ben Rhodes profile in the New York Times Magazine is just gross.

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by YankeeFan, May 7, 2016.

  1. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Deadspin would be proud:

  2. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    Good piece.
  3. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    Ick. It was even more indulgent than I imagined possible. David Samuels is a fucking tool.

    As an aside, I'm sure John Kerry will be interested to read this:

    He is, according to the consensus of the two dozen current and former White House insiders I talked to, the single most influential voice shaping American foreign policy aside from Potus himself.
    YankeeFan likes this.
  4. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    So I read this again today and I'm wondering: Is this actually a takedown that's just way too subtle? Was that the author's intent?

    I mean, it's easy to read this an see what a fucking moron Rhodes is. But is the author really letting him compare himself to Holden Caufield, and say how much he despises phonies, then in the next paragraph pointing out how his entire job is phony as a way to twist the knife?

    I'm not entirely sure. I can see how maybe the lead is intentionally precious to make Rhodes look like a liberal dipshit.

    The last paragraph of the story is actually kind of devastating. You couldn't come away thinking Rhodes was a bigger asshole.
  5. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    I kept thinking Samuels viewed Rhodes through a "this could be me" lens.
    YankeeFan likes this.
  6. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Should I add a poll:

  7. Earthman

    Earthman Well-Known Member

    Roger Goodell uses Peter King to create a narrative for The NFL
  8. TigerVols

    TigerVols Well-Known Member

    I don't have a horse in the race, and perhaps since I'm not the Washington Post sitting here seeing the fabulous access my blood enemy received inside the White House, I thought the story was fabulous. I'm a pretty close observer of the President and yet there were skads of details in this story I had never read before. Isn't that the whole point of a takeout like this?

    I get the sense that the White House is the political version of the NFL, using its own form of NFL.com's "beat writers" to message directly to the voters...filling a huge void left by the Chernobyl winter the Internet brought upon journalism.

    As for the author of the story, you have to admit this is a great line:

    Getting Rhodes to speak directly about the man whose gestalt he channels is a bit like asking someone to look into a mirror while describing someone else’s face.

    Edit: I see Booman and I made the simultaneous point about the WH's NFLishness. Welp.
    Last edited: May 8, 2016
    wicked and YankeeFan like this.
  9. Earthman

    Earthman Well-Known Member

    No doubt now how the Benghazi narrative was created.
  10. Earthman

    Earthman Well-Known Member

    Really disconcerting that The White House inner circle has not treated Kerry with more respect.
    He is arguably one of the finest statesman or our time. It's clear after the Jeffrey Goldberg Atlantic article last month and now this one that President Obama does not value Kerry's advise. It seems more like The White House just wants to use Kerry as a buffer who they can blame if things go wrong.
    Last edited: May 9, 2016
  11. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    Could be onto something.

    Readers are usually wiser to this kind of stuff than we think.
  12. Earthman

    Earthman Well-Known Member

    In the current state of media you really have to question whether any story can be taken at face value. This is especially true with political stories. What's the end game.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page