In D.C. you spend a lot of time around journalists. When you spend a lot of time around journalists, you pick up annoying habits—like, say, uttering "Well, off the record—" before even the most banal of statements. "Well, off the record, I hear it's going to be 87 degrees tomorrow. Don't quote me on that." "Well, off the record, I think the 'skins are going to struggle this year. But, you know, don't publish that or anything."
You wind up doing this because every journalist around you is constantly on the prowl for a story. Juicy quotes are better than boring quotes, and people tend to say juicy things when they don't realize there's a reporter there getting ready to screw them. For instance:
Everyone, even/especially other journalists, should remember that journalists are not your friends. pic.twitter.com/aF4xxvAKNq
— Sonny Bunch (@SonnyBunch) June 21, 2016
At least that guy anonymized his grubby quotemongering. Less fortunate was Suki Kim, who was quoted, by name, in the New York Times, attacking another author. Here's what Kim said:
Ms. Kim complained that books by white male writers on North Korea were better received in some quarters than books like her own. Adam Johnson’s "The Orphan Master’s Son" won the Pulitzer Prize for fiction in 2013, though Mr. Johnson did not speak Korean and had spent only three days in North Korea, Ms. Kim said. She attributed that acclaim at least partly to racism from institutions dominated by white men.
What was the context of her quote?
Kim says she knew Nordland was a journalist (she considers herself a journalist as well) but she says she had no idea they were having an on-the-record conversation for a story. They were at a book festival, after all, one exclusively for authors, and Nordland never mentioned he planned to write an article for The Times.
I think Kim's comments fall somewhere between ridiculous and abhorrent (and, indeed, was implicitly responding to them in this essay about the absurdity of the kerfuffle Kim was commenting upon). But the decision to publish them at all is even more ridiculous and abhorrent.
I find myself amazed that the New York Times or reporter Rod Norland thinks this is even remotely responsible. How much effort would it have taken to clarify with Kim after the fact whether or not she was okay with their private conversation being splashed all over the newspaper of record? Would she have even objected to having the quote published in some anonymized form?
The problem with this isn't that the words were wrong or the idea was taken out of context; everyone seems to agree she said what she said. But the idea that everyone should have to be on guard, at all times, around every single journalist they know is utter lunacy. And, frankly, bad for journalists. If this is the ethos of our profession, we deserve to be shunned (more so, I mean). No more fancy cocktail parties for you, scumbags.
So, you know, be careful when you're around someone you know to be a journalist. Don't say anything funny or interesting. They will screw you in a quick second if it means a juicy quote for their story or a bunch of retweets.