[imagesource: Evan Agostini/Invision/AP]

Ronan Farrow is responsible for breaking some of the defining stories of our time, and it was his investigation into Harvey Weinstein that set the wheels in motion for his eventual arrest and imprisonment.

His book, Catch and Kill, contains numerous sordid details about famous people and institutions (he also covered Donald Trump’s affair with a Playboy Playmate), and Farrow has become a household name around the world over the past few years.

That doesn’t mean he’s above scrutiny, however, and the New York Times’ media columnist, Ben Smith, has done a deep dive into 32-year-old Farrow’s background, and reporting, in what many are calling a hit piece.

Headlined ‘Is Ronan Farrow Too Good to be True?’, Smith scrutinises some of Farrow’s reporting, whilst making it clear that “he does not make things up”.

Feel free to read that article in full, but here’s a summary of sorts via Rolling Stone:

The piece pokes holes in various allegations leveled by Farrow’s reporting, most notably in Catch and Kill, but it primarily centers on the claim that Farrow has built a brand on suggesting the existence of conspiracies that his reporting doesn’t back up.

Let’s zoom in on the criticism of Catch and Kill:

Smith also alleges that Farrow failed to contact a key corroborating witness for an allegation against former NBC Today show host Matt Lauer, who was let go from the network in 2017 following sexual-harassment allegations. In Catch and Kill, Farrow recounts one of Lauer’s accusers tearfully telling a co-worker at NBC News about Lauer assaulting her.

But Smith says that the witness was never contacted by Farrow or by the fact-checker for Catch and Kill, and that when Farrow spoke to the witness directly, he did not remember the scene as described in the book.

Smith also takes issue with Farrow’s depiction of himself in Catch and Kill as a victim of NBC News attempting to bury the Weinstein story. The book suggests that Weinstein essentially blackmailed the network into burying the story about him in exchange for suppressing information about Lauer.

When refusing to cover the story at the time, NBC News said that Farrow’s reporting was not well-sourced enough, and didn’t include sufficient on-the-record, on-camera interviews.

Overall, Smith makes the overarching claim that Farrow has built a brand as a so-called “#resistance journalist” in the era of #MeToo by hinting at and suggesting conspiracies without citing any direct evidence to back them up. Farrow himself addressed this critique in an interview last year with Rolling Stone: “Conspiracies aren’t fake. Conspiracies happen all the time. Conspiracy is a legal term of art that produces tangible legal charges with some frequency. What I document in this book is not a conspiracy theory,” he said at the time.

As the fallout to Smith’s article spread across social media, many pointed to the fact that Smith himself has been criticised for failing to verify information before publishing.

Some characterised the article as media squabbling, whilst others came out in support of the critique, saying Farrow’s work shows the “increasing popularity of a certain type of agenda-driven journalism”:

In statements to The New York Times, both the New Yorker editor-in-chief, David Remnick, and Farrow’s publisher, Little, Brown, stood by Farrow’s reporting.

“Little, Brown and Company fully supports Ronan Farrow and his reporting in Catch and Kill,” a spokesperson for Little, Brown told Rolling Stone.

“Ronan’s dedication to a deep and thorough fact-check of his reporting, his commitment to the rights of victims and his impeccable attention to detail and nuance make us proud to be his publisher.”

Farrow himself also addressed some of Smith’s claims via this Twitter thread, which begins as follows:

He finished by saying “I stand by my reporting”.

Anybody who writes investigative pieces containing allegations against powerful people and institutions will eventually be subject to a scathing takedown, and Farrow is no different.

You can read the New York Times article in full here.

[source:rollingstone]