Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Art of Pitching: How I Got Published in The Atlantic

upupgrow.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 97 posts

Re: The Art of Pitching: How I Got Published in The Atlantic

#81

Post by paulsutter »

mike2477 wrote: post #26
pieterhg wrote: post #20

There's more to this story. I was the first person to be interviewed by this journalist (Michael Thomas @curious_founder). He approached me on Twitter to ask questions about digital nomad and remote work life (as I founded Nomad List and have been doing it for years). I told him it'd be great to see more honest depictions as most articles are heavily idealized making it sound all great, when it's not necessarily. It'…

So this isn't entirely true either.. Here's my take: What I did wrong - I didn't run the quotes by Pieter before publishing. I was on a tight deadline, and I simply skipped this step. That was a mistake, but not unethical. Journalists are not required to run quotes by their sources. I only quoted from what Pieter told me. Those who want to verify can hear the whole interview here -- https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B…

Thanks for posting. You have confirmed Pieter's version of events: you were more interested in a provocative angle than you were in representing facts accurately.

Re: The Art of Pitching: How I Got Published in The Atlantic

#82

Post by pieterhg »

devoply wrote: post #74
jventura wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad journalism happens everywhere! Some years ago my father was interviewed for a local newspaper about the stadiums that Portugal had to build to host "Euro 2004", an European soccer cup. He said that he didn't like that the government decided to spend a lot of money on it, etc. A few days later the interview came out, and it was fully reversed, saying that he agreed with the stadiums and that it was a good opportun…

They write what they want to write, you're just a source. So yeah don't think they'll write your story for your benefit. You need to hire an expensive P/R agency if you want to do that. But on the other hand if you know their interests and your interests align with their, in that you can produce a click-baity idea for them then they might bite. But yeah be weary of the media. They have their own problems to solve. Th…

Thank you! I learnt my lesson and lost some of my naivety.

Re: The Art of Pitching: How I Got Published in The Atlantic

#83

Post by [deleted] »

devoply wrote: post #74
jventura wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad journalism happens everywhere! Some years ago my father was interviewed for a local newspaper about the stadiums that Portugal had to build to host "Euro 2004", an European soccer cup. He said that he didn't like that the government decided to spend a lot of money on it, etc. A few days later the interview came out, and it was fully reversed, saying that he agreed with the stadiums and that it was a good opportun…

They write what they want to write, you're just a source. So yeah don't think they'll write your story for your benefit. You need to hire an expensive P/R agency if you want to do that. But on the other hand if you know their interests and your interests align with their, in that you can produce a click-baity idea for them then they might bite. But yeah be weary of the media. They have their own problems to solve. Th…

[deleted]

Re: The Art of Pitching: How I Got Published in The Atlantic

#85

Post by [deleted] »

mike2477 wrote: post #26
pieterhg wrote: post #20

There's more to this story. I was the first person to be interviewed by this journalist (Michael Thomas @curious_founder). He approached me on Twitter to ask questions about digital nomad and remote work life (as I founded Nomad List and have been doing it for years). I told him it'd be great to see more honest depictions as most articles are heavily idealized making it sound all great, when it's not necessarily. It'…

So this isn't entirely true either.. Here's my take: What I did wrong - I didn't run the quotes by Pieter before publishing. I was on a tight deadline, and I simply skipped this step. That was a mistake, but not unethical. Journalists are not required to run quotes by their sources. I only quoted from what Pieter told me. Those who want to verify can hear the whole interview here -- https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B…

[deleted]

Re: The Art of Pitching: How I Got Published in The Atlantic

#86

Post by jcoffland »

6stringmerc wrote: post #37

This is a great article if somebody has unlimited resources to pay rent, buy food, and focus on obtaining a basically temporal literary achievement; however, it offers no practical utility with respect to actually getting paid to write and earn a living by way of the craft, so...uhh...if you need a textbook fluff piece, here ya go.

You mean life is keeping you from doing what you really want to do? I think most people feel that way.

Re: The Art of Pitching: How I Got Published in The Atlantic

#87

Post by firebones »

jsmthrowaway wrote: post #68
nitrogen wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience from myself and people I know being misquoted or misrepresented, it's when the stakes are low (except maybe someone's profit motive) that things are at their worst. I haven't had any problems myself with my now-sidelined startup, but when I was a teenager I was misquoted about something as trivial as a local video store. Others I know have been misrepresented to an extreme degree on political topics…

Different issue, but related. Low impact stories are often rushed and not rigorously written. Sloppy versus actual malice, and I use that very specific legal term intentionally; reading about that and Sullivan will better illustrate the distinction I'm making between the two than I ever could. Playing hardball with sources as that commenter describes is high stakes stuff. Sloppy stories are sloppy stories because the…

I agree with your bigger point, but it seems like what's at play here is the asymmetry. Low-impact to WSJ/NYT could potentially be very high-impact (positively or negatively) to the subject of the quote.

I can imagine a lot of scenarios where people feel burned.

Let's say a journalist is doing a piece on topical topic X. They get a bunch of mundane talking points from the usual sources in favor of X. Then they interview a more nuanced founder who is generally in favor of X, but offers a choice quote offering caution. When the story is constructed, the narrative sets up how X is this big trend, but the outspoken-yet-balanced founder--who happens to have a quote or two on the anti-X side of the spectrum--suddenly is found to be the opposition (despite being in the business of promoting X).

It's easy to see how the journalist feels like they got a good quote (founder of X-related company breaks news by not parroting blub-founders!), while the founder feels betrayed (95% of my discussion was blub in favor of X, and you chose my nuanced 5% to paint me as outside the mainstream!)

So from the WSJ/NYT point of view--jeez, here's another obligatory story on tech X, but at least one person gave us an edgy quote. And from the nuanced founder point of view--damn, those slimy journos took me out of context and painted me outside the X herd.

Re: The Art of Pitching: How I Got Published in The Atlantic

#88

Post by wishinghand »

pessimizer wrote: post #69
77yy77yy wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a WSJ journalist threaten me if I don't participate he'll write whatever he wants. Another NY Times journalists wrote completely made up stories and sold their version of it to the public. I really don't like the media, a bunch of bullies and slimeballs.

> I had a WSJ journalist threaten me if I don't participate he'll write whatever he wants. You don't abandon a story if the people you are writing about refuse to participate. There's nothing wrong with this.

It seems like you missed the tone. The OP is implying that if they didn't give a quote for the sorry, the journalist will write them saying what they want them to say.

Re: The Art of Pitching: How I Got Published in The Atlantic

#89

Post by danso »

anigbrowl wrote: post #51
mike2477 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So this isn't entirely true either.. Here's my take: What I did wrong - I didn't run the quotes by Pieter before publishing. I was on a tight deadline, and I simply skipped this step. That was a mistake, but not unethical. Journalists are not required to run quotes by their sources. I only quoted from what Pieter told me. Those who want to verify can hear the whole interview here -- https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B…

I read your how-to article, and enjoyed your writing. And I came away with the impression that Pieter (who I had never heard of before) had chosen to settle down in Amsterdam, as in buying a house or somesuch. I wasn't interested enough in digital nomadism to go and read the article about him, but I thought I might read it over the weekend. then I come here and discover that Pieter was just spending a few months in A…

> And please don't use the 'tight deadline' excuse. It was your first story, yes? So you either leave yourself some wiggle room or be extra extra careful to represent your subject accurately. While your feelings and emotions have been hurt by Pieter haunting you on the net, how much worse do you think he felt to see an inaccurate portrayal of himself in a prestigious nationally read magazine, which readers default to taking at face value?

Great point, among many. If I'm reading both the rebuttal and rebuttal-rebuttal correctly, there didn't seem to be a need to skew the narrative in the way that Pieter alleges. It was an interesting story already, and Pieter himself says he was open to talking about the complexities of his own life and career. It was already compelling that he could admit that there were struggles and tradeoffs; knowing that he quit doesn't add much, nevermind that it appears to not be the truth.

Re: The Art of Pitching: How I Got Published in The Atlantic

#90

Post by kristianc »

coldtea wrote: post #71
Fnoord wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we want to combat clickbaiting, we need to stop making websites profitable the more they're read. If we take action to install uBlock (blocking) or AdNauseam (fake clicking), we make it at least less effective. In the latter case, we turn it around.

Well, clickbait might mean "BS content" to you, but it means "stuff we want to read" for those clicking on those links. We had clickbait titles for ages now for them to actually be a "bait" for anyone. Almost everybody knows what they'll get when they click on a listicle or a gossipy title or whatever, and they click on because they like the content.

This almost reads like 'We should encourage people to eat junk food because some people like the taste of it.'
Post reply on HN