counter create hit Killed: Great Journalism Too Hot to Print - Download Free eBook
Ads Banner
Hot Best Seller

Killed: Great Journalism Too Hot to Print

Availability: Ready to download

Killed resurrects remarkable articles that prestigious publications such as The New Yorker, the New York Times Magazine, Harper's, and Rolling Stone assigned to accomplished writers for sizeable fees, then discarded for reasons having nothing to do with their quality and everything to do with their potential for unwanted controversy, political incorrectness, or undue press Killed resurrects remarkable articles that prestigious publications such as The New Yorker, the New York Times Magazine, Harper's, and Rolling Stone assigned to accomplished writers for sizeable fees, then discarded for reasons having nothing to do with their quality and everything to do with their potential for unwanted controversy, political incorrectness, or undue pressure from an advertiser. Read for the first time Mike Sager's profile of Palestinian militants involved in the intifada of 1987 that was killed by the Washington Post Magazine because his story did not side with Israel, and Ted Rall's essay on his deadbeat dad that was deemed too dark by the New York Times Magazine for its Father's Day issue. While the notion of a killed article is nothing new, the breakneck pace of media consolidation has raised the stakes for contrarian writers and readers as independent publishers dwindle. Killed arises out of this moment, bringing these outstanding pieces of censored journalism into the public arena for the first time. Some of the other contributors included are Rich Cohen, Daniel Asa Rose, Alec Wilkinson, Noam Chomsky, Douglas Rushkoff, Pat Jordan, Robert Fisk, Clive Thompson, Silvana Paternostro, Glenn O'Brien, Christopher Hitchens, Gore Vidal, and Luc Sante.


Compare
Ads Banner

Killed resurrects remarkable articles that prestigious publications such as The New Yorker, the New York Times Magazine, Harper's, and Rolling Stone assigned to accomplished writers for sizeable fees, then discarded for reasons having nothing to do with their quality and everything to do with their potential for unwanted controversy, political incorrectness, or undue press Killed resurrects remarkable articles that prestigious publications such as The New Yorker, the New York Times Magazine, Harper's, and Rolling Stone assigned to accomplished writers for sizeable fees, then discarded for reasons having nothing to do with their quality and everything to do with their potential for unwanted controversy, political incorrectness, or undue pressure from an advertiser. Read for the first time Mike Sager's profile of Palestinian militants involved in the intifada of 1987 that was killed by the Washington Post Magazine because his story did not side with Israel, and Ted Rall's essay on his deadbeat dad that was deemed too dark by the New York Times Magazine for its Father's Day issue. While the notion of a killed article is nothing new, the breakneck pace of media consolidation has raised the stakes for contrarian writers and readers as independent publishers dwindle. Killed arises out of this moment, bringing these outstanding pieces of censored journalism into the public arena for the first time. Some of the other contributors included are Rich Cohen, Daniel Asa Rose, Alec Wilkinson, Noam Chomsky, Douglas Rushkoff, Pat Jordan, Robert Fisk, Clive Thompson, Silvana Paternostro, Glenn O'Brien, Christopher Hitchens, Gore Vidal, and Luc Sante.

30 review for Killed: Great Journalism Too Hot to Print

  1. 4 out of 5

    Alex Black

    This was a really interesting read. It took me over a month to read not because it was bad but because I never wanted to read more than 1-2 articles a day. I thoroughly enjoyed all the different topics and writers, and the wide range of articles chosen. As with any anthology, some were hit and miss. The satire was largely a miss for me just because I don't particularly enjoy it, but Robert Fisk and Mike Sager both wrote incredibly interesting articles that were critical of Israel's role in the c This was a really interesting read. It took me over a month to read not because it was bad but because I never wanted to read more than 1-2 articles a day. I thoroughly enjoyed all the different topics and writers, and the wide range of articles chosen. As with any anthology, some were hit and miss. The satire was largely a miss for me just because I don't particularly enjoy it, but Robert Fisk and Mike Sager both wrote incredibly interesting articles that were critical of Israel's role in the conflict in the Middle East, a topic which I now want to read more of. I did wish there was more commentary on the articles. Because there was such a wide range chosen, both of topics and time frame (from 1942-2003), I lacked context for a lot of them. I had to do a fair amount of outside research just to get a basic understanding of the topic, and I found myself thinking just a little more of an explanation in the commentary would have been incredibly helpful. But overall, if this sounds like a book that will interest you, it probably will.

  2. 5 out of 5

    Justin

    Most of the stories in this collection were worth reading, and some were fantastic. The standouts were "Unfortunate Con," "The Stranger-than-Truth Story of The Body Shop," "Mein Doll," and "Chills and Spills for Children of All Ages."

  3. 5 out of 5

    Linda Maxie

    Killed is a good example of a book that forces you to think. While all the stories share the fate of being "killed" or unpublished by various publishing outlets, they are quite varied in seriousness. The time period covered is 1943-2003. Writers as well respected as George Orwell are included. Obviously, for a work to be killed, it must be capable of offending someone. Sometimes that someone is a sponsor; sometimes it is readers; sometimes the reason is more obscure and ominous. I enjoyed the bo Killed is a good example of a book that forces you to think. While all the stories share the fate of being "killed" or unpublished by various publishing outlets, they are quite varied in seriousness. The time period covered is 1943-2003. Writers as well respected as George Orwell are included. Obviously, for a work to be killed, it must be capable of offending someone. Sometimes that someone is a sponsor; sometimes it is readers; sometimes the reason is more obscure and ominous. I enjoyed the book because I learned a lot from it. That is one of my requirements for a book worth reading. It opened my eyes to stories and viewpoints that were kept out of the mainstream press while the events were happening. I look at this book as an old chest in the attic. The things inside are sometimes puzzling, sometimes smelly, and sometimes enchanting. I would say that, unless you are squeamish, this would be a good book for anyone to read.

  4. 4 out of 5

    Carrie

    This was a good and easy read, for the most part. It includes a 1994 expose on The Body Shop's bad corporate behavior (all the standards: hypocrisy, false advertising, theft, manipulation, gross crap in the products), a 2002 editorial on the failures of journalism (specifically, in regard to reporting on Israeli-Palestinian events), a good one investigating the life of the guy who claimed that Karl Rove told him that George Bush was arrested for cocaine possession, and several other informative This was a good and easy read, for the most part. It includes a 1994 expose on The Body Shop's bad corporate behavior (all the standards: hypocrisy, false advertising, theft, manipulation, gross crap in the products), a 2002 editorial on the failures of journalism (specifically, in regard to reporting on Israeli-Palestinian events), a good one investigating the life of the guy who claimed that Karl Rove told him that George Bush was arrested for cocaine possession, and several other informative or entertaining articles. It also includes the 1958 Betty Friedan article that became "The Feminine Mystique", and a little book review by George Orwell. I'm not sure why these two are in here, except to provide a longer span of coverage for the book. Is anybody really surprised that McCalls didn't run the Friedan article? No. Does anybody really care that much about her any more, except to give her a few props and many criticisms? No. I picked up this book expecting to be shocked, or at the very least, surprised. "The Feminine Mystique", and the ideas in it (which are the same ideas in the would-have-been McCalls article) are no longer shocking or surprising (or interesting, in and of themselves). The only reason to read Freidan is if you're interested in gender studies or women's history. I guess the inclusion of Orwell's piece is more justifiable (Orwell is still interesting), but still. One shouldn't pretend that one has compiled the most interesting suppressed journalism since 1942, when one has only managed to obtain one such article each from the 40's, 50's, and 60's, two from the 80's, and the remaining 19 from all the years between 1990 and 2003. My final complaint: the editor makes too-liberal use of the word "spanked", i.e. "David Owen's article spanked the media for velvety coverage of the tobacco industry" and "...a magazine that Friedan later spanked for assuming 'women are fluffy, brainless kittens'..." WTF, dude? Magazines and the media are not spank-able, even metaphorically.

  5. 4 out of 5

    Kaylee

    I was disappointed. I can see why editors rejected most of these articles. Most are rambling pieces that are several thousand words too long. I'm not a magazine reader so maybe I'm just not familiar with the usual format. But two things struck me as odd: (1) The fact that nothing was sourced. The book contains no notes, bibliography, nothing. That's fine for fluff pieces, but many of the articles claim to be works of serious investigative journalism. Do magazines not print this information? Even I was disappointed. I can see why editors rejected most of these articles. Most are rambling pieces that are several thousand words too long. I'm not a magazine reader so maybe I'm just not familiar with the usual format. But two things struck me as odd: (1) The fact that nothing was sourced. The book contains no notes, bibliography, nothing. That's fine for fluff pieces, but many of the articles claim to be works of serious investigative journalism. Do magazines not print this information? Even so, this is a book and this info is sorely missing. (2) The sheer length of some of the articles. Some of the articles were 30, 40, even 50 pages long. Good grief. I often found myself asking where the authors were going. A good editor could have cleaned them up and organized the information better but I wonder how many thought it just wasn't worth the effort. Another flaw of the book is that it only gives the authors' side of the story as to why the article was "killed." The authors filter their editors' criticisms but the editors don't get a voice. What if the article was turned in late, over length, and with a sloppy source list (or none) for the editor to check? Maybe it was easier to kill than rush to print. I don't know if that happened, but I think it's only fair to allow the editors to speak to why the story was killed. Some of the subjects were interesting but the presentation is flawed in my opinion.

  6. 4 out of 5

    Oliver

    highlights include: A really in-depth article about J.H. Hatfield, the author of the controversial W. Bush biography Fortunate Son, who died shortly after the book was published. Many leftists argue that his death was not really a suicide, as it was reported. This article exposes Hatfield as a liar and criminal throughout his life, which lessens the credibility of the biography. Too bad, since I'd love to believe that the Bush party had something to do with Hatfield's death. Now, someone will nee highlights include: A really in-depth article about J.H. Hatfield, the author of the controversial W. Bush biography Fortunate Son, who died shortly after the book was published. Many leftists argue that his death was not really a suicide, as it was reported. This article exposes Hatfield as a liar and criminal throughout his life, which lessens the credibility of the biography. Too bad, since I'd love to believe that the Bush party had something to do with Hatfield's death. Now, someone will need to do an in-depth analysis of the character of Mark Schone, who wrote this article. An article exposing The Body Shop as a hypocritical, evil company, despite its social activist image. Sadly, this company is still in business, though it is now owned by Loreal. It's founder, Anita Roddick, died in 2007, which I can't say is a bad thing. There are a few other good articles, but much of this book is actually pretty boring, making the reader wonder whether some of these articles were Killed for good reason. No wonder it's a remaindered book. Too bad those two articles were never published; now, their potential audiences are quite small. Let me know if you want to borrow this!

  7. 5 out of 5

    Nancy

    Behind the scenes look at why some stories don't make it to publication and why...however, it didn't give the full picture. The authors give their perspective on what they were told was the reason and/or speculate as to why a certain magazine would turn them down. In addition they should have had the editor of the publication explain why the story wasn't used and that could have completed the picture. Story that should have gone to print: "Are Women Wasting Their Time in College? by Betty Frieda Behind the scenes look at why some stories don't make it to publication and why...however, it didn't give the full picture. The authors give their perspective on what they were told was the reason and/or speculate as to why a certain magazine would turn them down. In addition they should have had the editor of the publication explain why the story wasn't used and that could have completed the picture. Story that should have gone to print: "Are Women Wasting Their Time in College? by Betty Friedan (this led to her writing more in depth about the topic which turned into the ground breaking book "The Feminine Mystique). Stories that should have gone to another publication if they marketed it to the correct genre or audience: "Mascots Reign at Fall", "Money Changes Everything" & "The Lay-Z-Boy Position". Story that sucked & no wonder if wasn't published: "A Ramble Through Lebanon" by PJ O'Rourke. Story I looked up more info on since the book was released in 2004 & I wanted to know updates on: "Chills and Spills for Children of All Ages" by Jan Pottker. Definitely worth a read if you are a writer or editor.

  8. 4 out of 5

    Shonna Froebel

    This is a book that has been on my shelf for a while and I finally pulled it down to read. Wallis has gathered a number of articles commissioned from 1942 to 2003 by a variety of newspapers and magazines, but cancelled before making it to print. They vary widely in subject and were pulled for a number of reasons. Many of the would-be publications didn't give clear and honest reasons for the cancellation of the articles, and some were published later either in other publications, or in books. It wa This is a book that has been on my shelf for a while and I finally pulled it down to read. Wallis has gathered a number of articles commissioned from 1942 to 2003 by a variety of newspapers and magazines, but cancelled before making it to print. They vary widely in subject and were pulled for a number of reasons. Many of the would-be publications didn't give clear and honest reasons for the cancellation of the articles, and some were published later either in other publications, or in books. It was very interesting to read, and I learned a lot about a variety of issues and people. Politics keeps coming up here, whether it is government politics, business politics, or gender politics. It is interesting to see how fear limited the sharing of information, and see how the editorial process works. Self-censorship is one of the worst forms of censorship, based on fear of risk, whether it be of reader reaction, offended advertisers, or future access to those of importance. I'm glad I read it.

  9. 4 out of 5

    Matt Daneman

    An interesting collection of stories - some long form, some just a few hundred words - that were spiked by one publication or another for various reasons and never saw the light of day. Some of them are really neat reads -- the takedown of Body Shop, the 'green' bath and body products chain, for example, or the examination of the Moonie Church's ownership of the Washington Times. The claim throughout the book is that the stories never ran because of politics, influence, money, advertiser issues An interesting collection of stories - some long form, some just a few hundred words - that were spiked by one publication or another for various reasons and never saw the light of day. Some of them are really neat reads -- the takedown of Body Shop, the 'green' bath and body products chain, for example, or the examination of the Moonie Church's ownership of the Washington Times. The claim throughout the book is that the stories never ran because of politics, influence, money, advertiser issues and the like. That well may be true, though some of them arguably also didn't run because they were just not all that well done or not what the publication wanted (like the piece that ostensibly was supposed to be about shortcomings in media coverage of Afghanistan that ended up almost solely about Palestine), or the science magazine essay that was also a sort of polemic against the modern media-verse. Overall, worthwhile.

  10. 4 out of 5

    Bee Meekers

    Good writing. You can tell that a lot of time and effort was put into researching for and writing the pieces. Some of the articles, however, really just aren't my cup of tea so I didn't read all of them. I enjoyed "Are Women Wasting their Time in College?" by Betty Friedan and I like the little prefaces before each article discussing how the author came to write the piece and how it got "killed." If you really like journalism, I'd check this book out; you might enjoy it.

  11. 5 out of 5

    Harvey

    - an interesting collection of articles commissioned by publications like Harper's, Vanity Fair, and The New Yorker...but then discarded - not for reasons of quality, but because their potential for unwanted controversy. - Jon Entine's devastating investigation of The Body Shop's deceptive marketing practices was my favourite

  12. 5 out of 5

    Patrick

    This will give you some insight into the politics of journalism. A politic that it should be wholly separated from but we all know it isn't. Some of the pieces are dated now and are interesting only as curiosities, but the later ones are especially compelling. This is one of those books where if it sounds even slightly interesting to you then you should get a copy.

  13. 5 out of 5

    Jeff

    This is a great collection of items that were once hotly pursued by print media but met an untimely demise (usually without explanation and a clear implication of weird prejudice) at the editorial level. The piece about John Mellencamp's love of smoking while getting blown is an excellent justification for reading the entire collection (of, admittedly, heavier topics).

  14. 4 out of 5

    SmarterLilac

    So excellent. Each of these stellar pieces tells us much about the topics still considered taboo in our allegedly enlightened modern age. Sadly, I'm of the opinion that not one of these articles would make it to an audience today, even from the most jaded of the fringe presses.

  15. 5 out of 5

    Sarah Pascarella

    An interesting study of self-censorship, as well as paranoia. There were so many typos in this book, though, that I wondered if it was rushed to press--and maybe not thoroughly fact-checked, either?

  16. 5 out of 5

    Daniel

    Read this specifically for an expose on The Body Shop and its owner -- a must read.

  17. 4 out of 5

    Shari

    Some of these pieces are incredible, particurly the story on The Body Shop.

  18. 5 out of 5

    Heidi Carreon

    I loved this book, I really do, especially because I plan to major in journalism. My favorite article was definitely the one by Betty Friedan.

  19. 5 out of 5

    Alex Cunningham

    A very mixed bag of articles, but the biting social commentary in some is worth the banality of the rest.

  20. 4 out of 5

    Susan Ferguson

    I don''t know that the "great" journalism applies to all the stories. Some of them are just, well, stories. Several of them cracked me up. Some were really good and interesting.

  21. 4 out of 5

    Kristy

    I forgot... I'm still reading this. Christ. Well, it's a bunch of different articles, so it's not too bad it's still in the "currently reading" pile... right!?

  22. 4 out of 5

    Adam Schragin

  23. 5 out of 5

    Jackie

  24. 5 out of 5

    Natalie

  25. 5 out of 5

    Eurydice

  26. 4 out of 5

    Rebecca

  27. 4 out of 5

    Steve

  28. 4 out of 5

    Cha-cha-cha

  29. 4 out of 5

    Mars Cabrera-Ramirez

  30. 5 out of 5

    Katie

Add a review

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

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.