As any journalist will tell you, there are few professional situations as vexing as when a friend becomes involved in a major story that you feel you must cover.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
As a journalist, the details always tell the story.
You will always have partial points of view, and you'll always have the story behind the story that hasn't come out yet. And any form of journalism you're involved with is going to be up against a biased viewpoint and partial knowledge.
You have to go where the story is to report on it. As a journalist, you're essentially running to things that other people are running away from.
That's always been my test for what makes a story: is this something journalists would gossip with each other about?
I think any journalist who spends time in a place realizes that there are lots of stories around beyond their primary story. You meet so many interesting people and have all kinds of experiences.
My inclination, as an old-school, classically trained journalist, is not to go with a story unless I have it hard. It's not good enough to say something based on rumors that were flying around.
Believe it or not, friendships are difficult to write in fiction. They can easily come across as forced, particularly if they involve too much explication and too many overt gestures of affection.
I tend to gravitate toward reporters who cover all aspects of the story: from personal aspects to the big picture that answer the 'so what' of a story.
It is not often that someone comes along who is a true friend and a good writer.
If somebody is in a story, they need to be there for a reason, and not just to set up somebody else's story.
No opposing quotes found.