So we've been enjoying the letters to Interview of late, but a tipster has chosen to shatter our faith in the epistles' integrity.
As a former editorial assistant at Interview, I can tell you with 100% accuracy that many of the letters to the editor are made up. I obviously can't vouch for today's example and the previous one, but it was my and the other assistant's responsibility to "factcheck" the letters page, and Brad Goldfarb (then Managing Editor, now Executive Editor), would frequently hand us ostensible letters to the editor that had no source material or contact info.Could it be that yesterday's missive was made up? (We know that last month's was real because we saw the writer's MySpace page.) Could this be a common practice not just at Interview but throughout the industry? Please direct your sordid tales of skullduggery to the usual address. We will get to the bottom of this.