The Washington Post, Sally Quinn and the Mink Stole Ladies: How much VIP-watching is too much?

image How closely should the world follow VIP journalists and politicians and—for that matter—celebrities in general?

“Newspapers spend too much time explaining themselves.” So  said Marcus Brauchli, executive editor of the Washington Post; and a media watcher even gave the pronouncement a name—the Brauchi Doctrine. Look, Marcus. Your paper is in decline for the moment despite some bright spots; but essentially it’s still a powerful monopoly daily at the metro level, trading off the fame of its writers or at least its Watergateglorified self. Why the devil shouldn’t the Washington City Paper and the rest keep calling up the Post on various topics? From all signs, Barnes & Noble won’t even stock The Solomon Scandals unless the Post reviews it. Even with the sacred names of Chandler and Hammett invoked, an enthusiastic City Paper write-up by a Yale lit major just didn’t count (Post bypass information here).

I’m endlessly amused when certain VIPs at the Post and elsewhere complain of too much publicity. Come on, guys. On the whole you love it—if nothing else, as a reminder you’re still alive. 

image image That’s partly why I’m sympathetic toward Sally Quinn even though I wish she’d stop defending her wedding column about her “dysfunctional” family. As a journalist she is more committed to disclosure than Brauchli appears to be. Emerson be damned, here’s to Ms. Quinn and consistency! Media critics, bloggers, novelists and other info-parasites—mea culpa—should join me in my quixotic call for a Quinn at Large column for both the print and electronic editions. Sometimes private and public lives should intersect. What if the Sally Quinn of the 1980s had been on the trail of John Edwards, a living, breathing Scandal who almost ended up A Heartbeat Away?

The other side: The Mink Stole Ladies Syndrome

image Despite the above, I can also see the VIPs’ side, and I agree with Carol Joynt on the need to factor in “collateral damage” to people written about, both celebrities and the obscure. What I’m really calling for is balance. As Exhibits A and B for the Joynt viewpoint, may I introduce to you Mink Stoles One and Two from The Solomon Scandals? They’re suburbanites at a party that a somewhat Quinnish columnist—no, not the Quinn—has thrown for “name-in-the-paper people” and those a few levels below. The Mink Stoles are jabbering away several decades ago, but the same scene could just as easily unfold in the PETA era. An excerpt follows.

I went to get myself a drink from Wendy’s bar, but instead stopped to overhear two fat women in mink stoles. They looked like clones; even the folds in the double chins matched. Both wore Elkins hairdos.

“It’s absolutely disgraceful, the way she carries on,” Mink Stole Number One was saying about an unnamed person.

“You’ve heard the pony story, haven’t you?” asked Two.

One shook her head.

“It’s sort of ancient,” said Number Two, “but it gives you an idea of why she’s so mixed up. She fell off this pony one day when she was little, and the family didn’t even see if she was hurt. They just ordered her back on. Tough, demanding people—both parents. She must have been starved for affection. So you can see why she’s so mixed up.”

“I’m glad she’s not mixed up with my daughter,” sighed Mink Stole Number One.

“I bet she’s on drugs.”

I was about to think it might be Wendy when one of the husbands materialized and presently asked whom the women were gossiping over.

“Why, Caroline Kennedy.”

“You know her?” asked the husband, a small, timid-sounding man who belonged to Number One.

“Well, not exactly,” said Number Two. “But you hear things.”

I’d spent years in McLean without meeting one Kennedy, and yet this woman spoke in the tones of a disapproving next-door neighbor. I wondered which tabloid was the source of her malarkey.

Author Image
David Rothman

2 thoughts on “The Washington Post, Sally Quinn and the Mink Stole Ladies: How much VIP-watching is too much?

  1. The paper is in decline? Has it ever occurred to you the entire news industry is in a massive paradigm shift and you are too close to even recognize it? Uh, nope, guess not, you can get away with mindless criticism of things about which you actually know nothing.

  2. > The paper is in decline?

    So circulation of the Washington Post’s paper editions is shooting upwards?

    And ad revenue couldn’t be better?

    I appreciate the feedback and will even leave in your problematic ID, but are you certain your question mark isn’t a typo? Or that you aren’t a-trollin’? Or doing some automated spamming—because you lack specifics?

    In case you are not, and also because I’m happy to enlighten others, let me point to a MediaBistro item at:

    That’s just one source of information documenting the decline. The Post has shut down domestic bureaus and bought out the contracts of some Pulitzer Prize-winning reporters.

    Granted, the Post newspaper can save itself with the right steps, the reason I said it’s in decline for the moment, as opposed to being doomed forever, but so far we lack definite proof of that a reinvented Post can work.

    The future of the online side looks better than for the print side. But the Post is up against competition not just from the New York Times but also the Wall Street Journal as well as suburban newspapers and topic-niche sites.

    I’d love to see the Post Company skipping dividend increases and sending more money to the WaPo newsroom. That would be a wonderful sign of confidence by management itself.

    On the Solomon Scandals site I’ve told how the Post newspaper could improve the bottom line. See:

    > Has it ever occurred to you the entire news industry is in a massive paradigm shift and you are too close to even recognize it.

    But we’re talking about the Post in particular, not the whole industry. Some dailies will do better; some, worse. People are trying different business models, moreover.

    I love the Post’s vision of a free ad-supported site, although, as a reader I’d be willing to pay $50-$75 a year, to assure the paper’s survival.

    In return, I’d like a much better presentation online and access to the full archives.

    The New York Times is easier to navigate and the ads are not quite as intrusive (no need to be so obnoxious if the advertising is informative and better targeted).

    More comprehensive local coverage from the Post would also score with me.

    Meanwhile I’m curious if you or family or friends have current or past connections with the Post? As one of the grunts? Or at the executive level?

    If you’re working for the Post, the very best of luck to you. Do share with us the specific reasons for your optimism.

    And if you have connections with a different news organization, maybe you can reveal its identity and spell out your feelings about the other company’s prospects as well.

    David Rothman

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.