The other evening I had the distinct pleasure of sharing an elevator with this guy (left).
This guy, is Andrew Ross Sorkin, a New York Times business reporter and one of the most powerful and celebrated journalists in town.
At the tender age of 32 Sorkin has authored a bestselling book, launched a lucrative, wildly-influential news division of the Times (providing much-needed Botox for the old Grey Lady) and broken hundreds- if not thousands- of stories.
Impressive achievements all. However what’s most notable about Sorkin to me is that he’s a courted, desired, well-compensated journalist in an age when newsrooms can’t fire people fast enough. Amazing. How did he do it? Out of curiosity (and jealousy) I paid $65 to see him speak at book signing hosted by our mutual alma mater’s networking club to see if I could shake him down for his secrets.
It didn’t go down quite like that, but there were some illuminating moments. Quick background: Sorkin is on a publicity tour for his new book, “Too Big to Fail: The Inside Story of How Wall Street and Washington Fought to Save the Financial System- and Themselves.” The title’s fairly self-explanatory, but the gist is that it’s a detailed account of the dramatis personae most intimately involved in the events leading up to Lehman Brothers’ collapse in September 2008.
I confess I’m on page 44 (and can’t wait to see how it ends!) so am not really in a position to judge but then again judging is what blogging is all about so here goes.
What makes Too Big remarkable is not the writing- which is serviceable- but the astounding detail Sorkin delves into about the thoughts, lives and moves of the execs and officials that fatal week. They’re all accounted for: Paulson, Geithner, Fuld, Mack…he got transcripts, scrupulous notes from top-secret meetings, calendars and tearful confessions. It reads (so far) like Danielle Steele, a crowd-pleasing romp through boardrooms and town cars. The color and nuance in every exchange verges on unbelievable.
That exacting detail lies at the heart of Sorkin’s controversial reputation. How did he wring damning tidbits from the biggest Masters of the Universe? Great sources- too great, say critics (many of them fellow journalists) who accuse Sorkin of blurring the ethical line by fraternizing with the Wall Street tipsters who help him break dozens of deals. Sorkin as the enfant terrible in the Times newsroom was pondered by New York Magazine last month in an article which summarized the tension thusly:
In these dark days for newspapers, Sorkin, with his un-Timesian public face, unorthodox methods, and precocious success, has become a flashpoint for some of his colleagues. At bottom, they see him as far too cozy with his sources. In a profession that tends, with religious fervor, to draw bright lines and stay behind them, Sorkin seems to cross back and forth without a care. While he has written critically about the financial mandarins he covers, a fawning quality can ooze into his prose that some other Times people find unbecoming
Sour grapes? Possibly. But this description of Too Big’s book party gave me pause:
Attendees—Sorkin’s presumed unnamed sources—included Jamie Dimon, John Mack, Ken Griffin, Steve Rattner, and Barry Diller. Warren Buffett mailed in an Ed McMahon–size “colossal-gram” that read, “Andrew … Congratulations! Your book will be bigger than this telegram.”
It’s the great conundrum of being a journalist- if your subjects or sources love your story you feel you’ve been too soft. If they hate it, you wonder if you were unfair. If you hear nothing- great. But wait- did anyone read it then? You lose on all fronts.
I don’t know where Sorkin falls on the slimebag spectrum when it comes to how he sources scoops but I have one theory (also suggested in the Nymag article): dudes love him. There is a certain kind of guy- young, with a boyish charm and scrappy, eager air- that other men cotton to for whatever reason. I happen to be engaged to such a guy so I’ve spent some time witnessing the phenomenon firsthand.
Sorkin was introduced at the talk I attended by his college advisor, a communications professor who spent almost half an hour (60% of the evening’s allotted time) narrating a gushy, fawning, awed tribute to his former student. No superlative was too lavish- brilliant, clever, handsome! Did you know current students consistently voted him most eligible alum until a vixen named Pilar Queen took him off the market? It’s true! He rode in the Rolling Stones’ tour bus! By the time Sorkin took the stage, the entire audience was thoroughly embarrassed.
During the Q&A, men in suits couldn’t rush the mic fast enough, lobbing eager (softball) questions to the ink-stained wunderkind, his 600-page hardcover clutched in their hands.
If I sound envious, I am and I’m not. Who wouldn’t envy Sorkin’s success and the respect he gets from (some of) his colleagues and readers? Provided he’s toed the ethical line, he’s gotten where he is on hard work, ambition, aggression and savvy. It’s inspiring in this media market to know someone- even if it’s just one freakin’ person- can be rewarded richly for this craft.
I am envious- or bitter- I suppose in that I didn’t get the best of impressions of Sorkin during our 2-second interaction in the elevator. He didn’t hold the door open for me when I was dashing in heels, he looked away when I smiled at him and was kind of a jackass to the check-in lady. Maybe he just reminds me of those douche-y guys from college who talked constantly in class and hit on freshmen. Maybe it’s because he resembles Ryan from the office (crossed with a handsomer Mr. Bean) or maybe I’m nursing a grudge because he was a Communications major. Everyone knows that’s a joke.
3 Comments
December 3, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Was it worth the $65? I have read some excerpts from the book and Sorkin seems to be a good story teller, but I was surprised by his apparent lack of understanding of bond market basics and that his editors let these slip through. However it is his bad elevator/coat check manners drop him off my A list.
December 4, 2009 at 10:56 am
Not sure if the talk/book combo was worth $65 but if Sorkin turns out to be fraud a la Stephen Glass, my signed copy will be priceless. It was a high-risk investment.
December 4, 2009 at 2:15 pm
I suspect that Sorkin’s colleagues at the TIMES regard anyone who isn’t emphatically anti-capitalist as “fawning.”
My question is what company did Sorkin launch that gives him the credibility to sit in judgment of market-proven entrepreneurs?
As for him being a elitist, I have no doubt. To meet a true gentleman you might look for someone from the South, or maybe Colorado.