What should we make of Elizabeth Holmes?
What should we make of Elizabeth Holmes?
ABC 165: On the people to whom we give platforms
I’ve been thinking about whose voices we choose to amplify. Perhaps this was spurred by the Donald Trump town hall on CNN or reading this week’s article, a buzzy profile of the disgraced Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes.
The journalist, Amy Chozick, wrestles with “writing a story about two different people” — Elizabeth Holmes, a criminal about to serve an 11-year prison sentence, and Liz Holmes, the San Diego mother of two who can’t stomach R-rated movies and volunteers for a rape crisis hotline.
The piece is a great read, chock-full of details of Holmes’s bucket hats and taco orders. But it also begs the question of whether it should have been written in the first place. Journalists must be responsible stewards of the public’s attention. And I can’t help but think there are others more deserving of the air time.
What do you think?
Here’s the piece: Liz Holmes Wants You to Forget About Elizabeth
Book updates:
The Good Enough Job comes out in **checks notes** 9 days! Now is a great time to order it if you haven’t already.
I was on the USAToday podcast and written up in The Times UK!
You can get all the details for the different tour stops here. There are only a few tickets left for NYC with Kevin Delaney (5/23) and SF with Zoë Schiffer (5/24).
Warmly,
Simo
P.S. The song of the week is a jazz classic by Alice Coltrane that feels more hip and modern with every listen. The full songs of the week playlist is here.
you raise a valid concern, but it’s still generally fair to hear the devils advocate to conventional wisdom, even if it feels counterproductive. Like even if someone is justifiably “cancelled,” that person deserves ability to rectify it to some degree, whether that be thru a defense lawyer, therapist or journalist. I do agree that this specific subject seems pretty dispicable, and don’t think the article will change my mind. but the journalist isnt necessarily any more incorrect, to sensationalize the story in this way, than anyone else providing all the coverage on it
I viewed the Times piece more as a nuanced picture of a troubled human living with the consequences of her previous actions than amplifying her voice. It reminded me the story of a real human doesn't have the same ending as the biopic(s).