@Julia Allison: Translation: "I'm a shallow, semifamous for being-semifamous bubblehead, and I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about, and have never read any of that complicated business stuff Sorkin writes, but he's nice to me in person (and kinda cute!), so he's immune from any criticism ever, even when it's deserved, which it might be in this case, I don't know, because I'm a bubblehead."
Hold on, before I finish the article, didn't Gawker previously pay out page view bonuses? If they're so horrible, why was this a part of their business practice pre-recession?
"pageview bonus to us. Which is an ugly practice that distorts news judgment and induces reporters to chase down attention-grabbing and salacious gossip" So the objection is Denton's pissed someone stole his pay structure idea? #andrewrosssorkin
Actually, what I heard from a close relative of Sorkin's -- I can't be more specific without blowing that person's identity -- is that one of Sorkin's ambitions is to go into finance and work for a private equity group. That's what this person told me about a year ago.
Obviously a lot has happened since then, so his plans might've changed, or maybe that was just one of several things he was considering. But that's what this person told me. #newyorkobserver
Sorkin is a star. Too much so to go to the Observer, unless it were to be remade into a real newspaper, maybe focusing on real estate and finance (and the incestuous relationship between the two). But that would take an investment by Jared, which he doesn't need to do if his whole point is to promote his wife. #newyorkobserver
I'd heard a reasonably well-sourced estimated that Sorkin was making about $200,000 a year. But that included something for DealBook.
The real question would be this: what is the nature of Sorkin's fee for running the financial blog and email newsletter?
Even if it's only a flat amount, other New York Times writers would start asking questions about compensation for their own blogging.
And if these "unusual incentive arrangements" included some kind of bonus for hitting targets for DealBook subscriptions, for instance? That would go against Times orthodoxy, the belief that journalism is necessarily compromised by any obvious quest for popularity. #newyorkobserver
Andrew Ross Sorkin, whose DealBook column normally appears on this page, is on a book tour.
The New York Times didn't run its 32-year-old superstar's weekly column. He's now in the UK. And the note (above) suggests that's why his piece didn't appear.
But a usually reliable tipster tells us that wasn't the whole explanation.
"I gather that the New York Times pulled Sorkin's column on Tuesday on the grounds that they thought it was not comprehensible, or not good enough - he had filed his regular column that day but the editors decided not to print it so they put something else in instead."
"Larry Ingrassia - man who issued the statement saying that all was well between Sorkin and the NYT business writers - made the final decision. I don't know what the column was about."
"Sort of interesting in view of the ongoing oldsters vs Sorkin tensions. NYT business desk abuzz about it, of course."
The ultimate success of Sork's book will be determined by how many unread pallets are purchased by bankers, PR firms and even proxy solicitors in an effort to buy a favor.
I've already gotten one as a "gift" from one of those constituencies, and can confirm that nobody wants to read that thing. It's too big, ironically. #andrewrosssorkin
Sorkin is a leech sucking on hoary reporters' leathery hides and one Gray Lady's teat. Reporters can't bite the hands that feed them crumbs (and sometimes more) so willingly. One so blow-dried and pretty also is incapable of being an 'outsider'. Sure he'll get face time on TV but don't expect him to do anything other than reveal the status quo. He's just another celebrity. #andrewrosssorkin
"easy way to fact check: FOIA the FOIAs. It will show when the Sorkin's first request for the docs was actually made."
I suspect that this will show serious inconsistencies in his claims. People like Sorkin, however, live in the realm of "benefit of the doubt" and "lack of evidence." It's very easy to lie. It's very hard to catch people who do it. #andrewrosssorkin
Sorkin's only crime was to be smarter, more resourceful, and more knowledgeable as to How The World Works Today. His older colleagues would do themselves a service by learning from him rather than being so petty and jealous of his success.
Cultivating connections is essential to being a good journalist, his elder colleagues know this, they're just not as good at it.
@Anthony De Rosa: Morgenson is one of the most respected journalist on the street known for her sharp commentary and breaking news reports. Andrew on the other hand makes it on TV because he looks good and most of the insight I've seen him share is just borrowed from what his team is reporting at the NYT.
Cook has done an excellent job at spelling out how Sorkin lifted first reported news from his own peers. It's shameful to see Sorkin try behave as if he did nothing wrong. He should own up to his mistakes.
Who reads all these insidery non-fiction books? Seriously. I mean, I can imagine reading maybe a long newspaper article about Paulson's Goldman connections during the bailout, but who needs 700 pages or whatever about this stuff? #andrewrosssorkin
11/09/09
[www.kidrobot.com]
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
Just asking...
Now, back to finishing this here blog post.
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/06/09
Obviously a lot has happened since then, so his plans might've changed, or maybe that was just one of several things he was considering. But that's what this person told me. #newyorkobserver
11/06/09
11/06/09
The real question would be this: what is the nature of Sorkin's fee for running the financial blog and email newsletter?
Even if it's only a flat amount, other New York Times writers would start asking questions about compensation for their own blogging.
And if these "unusual incentive arrangements" included some kind of bonus for hitting targets for DealBook subscriptions, for instance? That would go against Times orthodoxy, the belief that journalism is necessarily compromised by any obvious quest for popularity. #newyorkobserver
11/06/09
I am sure he loved being approached by Kushner, very flattering; enough so to continue to appear interested in the gig. #newyorkobserver
11/05/09
The New York Times didn't run its 32-year-old superstar's weekly column. He's now in the UK. And the note (above) suggests that's why his piece didn't appear.
But a usually reliable tipster tells us that wasn't the whole explanation.
"I gather that the New York Times pulled Sorkin's column on Tuesday on the grounds that they thought it was not comprehensible, or not good enough - he had filed his regular column that day but the editors decided not to print it so they put something else in instead."
"Larry Ingrassia - man who issued the statement saying that all was well between Sorkin and the NYT business writers - made the final decision. I don't know what the column was about."
"Sort of interesting in view of the ongoing oldsters vs Sorkin tensions. NYT business desk abuzz about it, of course."
#tips #rumormonger #andrewrosssorkin #newyorktimes
10/31/09
The ultimate success of Sork's book will be determined by how many unread pallets are purchased by bankers, PR firms and even proxy solicitors in an effort to buy a favor.
I've already gotten one as a "gift" from one of those constituencies, and can confirm that nobody wants to read that thing. It's too big, ironically. #andrewrosssorkin
10/31/09
10/31/09
I suspect that this will show serious inconsistencies in his claims. People like Sorkin, however, live in the realm of "benefit of the doubt" and "lack of evidence." It's very easy to lie. It's very hard to catch people who do it. #andrewrosssorkin
10/30/09
Cultivating connections is essential to being a good journalist, his elder colleagues know this, they're just not as good at it.
10/30/09
Cook has done an excellent job at spelling out how Sorkin lifted first reported news from his own peers. It's shameful to see Sorkin try behave as if he did nothing wrong. He should own up to his mistakes.
10/30/09
When the most respected real estate and housing blog on the web has a tag "Picking on poor Gretchen" it's probably not a good sign.
[www.calculatedriskblog.com] #andrewrosssorkin
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
[nymag.com] #andrewrosssorkin