Part of the conceit of Chozick’s story was being swept up by this version of Holmes, just as Theranos board members and investors had been by another persona. But multiple
Times journalists I spoke to felt that such asides and caveats were not enough to salvage the article or justify its framing. As one put it: “Why tell readers that a
New York Times editor thought a reporter was too credulous, and then use the story to prove it?” Or as another put it: “You have to ask, on our side, what the hell happened here?”
Holmes, I’m told, got help from
Risa Heller, the crisis communications maven, in brokering the
Times piece, according to multiple sources. (Heller did not respond to multiple requests for comment.)
The consternation over the Holmes profile and dispute over Carreyrou’s delayed announcement highlights the specific tension of business journalism, between getting access to CEOs and founders while also doing critical investigative work. “It’s disappointing, because it undercuts Erin, and obviously Carreyrou did a lot of really great reporting on all of this stuff,” said one
Times reporter. “And then we serve up a thing like that, and
The New York Times becomes known as a softball place for criminal millionaires to land their puff pieces. It sucks to see.”
As Holmes headed to jail Tuesday, business editor Ellen Pollock was put on the spot to defend a soft-focus profile of the disgraced Theranos founder, telling staff she didn’t “give a 🤬🤬🤬🤬” about the criticism.
www.vanityfair.com