I’m too superficial to read The New Yorker because it’s so unrelentingly boring. Even the cartoons suck these days. So back in 2008, soon after the writers strike ended, I said no when The New Yorker first approached me to cooperate for a profile. Fast forward to this summer, when the mag was desperate to liven up this week’s dullsville “Money Issue” with some Tinseltown mockery. The writer said the last time he profiled somebody without their cooperation was a serial killer. I would be joining Murderers Row. When I did start talking (but only with a lot of pre-conditions), months and weeks and hours of my time were wasted because little of what I said was used. (Not even when I responded to Peter Bart’s statement “I don’t think she has an impact among the real decision-makers” with this good quote, “Finally, Peter and I agree on something. He’s absolutely right: I’m not powerful, and I’m not influential. Which is why I don’t understand why The New Yorker is now crawling up my ass claiming I am.”) Instead, the article is a superficial clip job, no better than David Carr’s rushed Page One profile on me in The New York Times recently. As I expected, it’s an amusing caricature, only occasionally true but hardly insightful. Still, I’m relieved that The New Yorker didn’t lay a glove on me. I found Tad Friend, who covers Hollywood from Brooklyn, easy to manipulate, as was David Remnick, whom I enjoyed bitchslapping throughout but especially during the very slipshod factchecking process.
(Those draconian Conde Nast budget cuts have deflated the infamous hubris of this New Jersey dentist’s son.) But I wasn’t the only one able to knock out a lot of negative stuff in the article without even one lawyer letter, email, or phone call. I witnessed how The New Yorker really bent over for Hollywood. NYC power publicist Steven Rubenstein succeeded in deleting every reference to Paramount’s Brad Grey. Warner Bros and Universal and DreamWorks and William Morris/Endeavor and Summit Entertainment execs and flacks and consultants also had their way with the mag. (They were even laughing about it. When I asked one PR person what it took to convince Tad to take out whole portions of the article, the response was, “I swallowed.”) At Harvey Weinstein’s personal behest, his description of me as a “cunt” became “jerk”. (Then the article would have contained two references to me as a “cunt” in addition to its four uses of “fuck”. Si Newhouse must be so proud…) And so on. Now remember, readers: you, too, can make The New Yorker your buttboy. Just act like a cunt and treat Remnick like a putz and don’t give a fuck.




I wish everyone in Hollywood (not to mention Washington D.C.) had your balls, Nikki! Reading this post, I could not wipe the smile off my face.
OMG TOTALLY! the New Yorker is, like, SO like boring! I mean, can you believe some people like read, like, articles about stuff? Like, these are probably people who read, like, newspapers!!!
Eh, the profile was trasparently floundering and unfocussed, looking for unflattering things to say about Finke that ultimately didn’t carry that much weight. Perhaps unintended, the article presented Finke as relentlessly standing up for truth, the little guy, and the public. I walked away from the article with tremendous respect for Finke. Finally, an interesting story in the New Yorker…
It’s very difficult to feel sympathy for Hollywood executives when most of their effort goes into securing vast salaries, residuals, a bigger power base than colleagues and peers, and if threatened with the sack, massive golden handshakes.
It’s intriguing to discover they are so sensitive to what others think of them while they display macho ruthlessness in pursuit of the mighty dollar that they will ask a jobbing journalist to mute some of his comments for publication.
I applaud Finke’s ability to deflate pomposity and wound hypocricy. She’ll find a ton of it every day in venal, “What does “integrity” mean?” Hollywood.
However …
I wish she didn’t resort to the destructive “snark” her enemies use. She has no need to indulge in the fashionable snark of defaming. Studio executives are adept at self-belittling. She need only report the facts and leave readers to join the dots.
More good satire, wit, insight into the ridiculous in human behaviour, and searing adjectives and phrases than they can ever employ, ought to be her tools of trade. And in her justified scorn at the banality of the New Yorker magazine she boasts of “manipulating” its commissioned reporter sent to interview her. That’s rather too vindictive for my liking, a touch of the boozer’s paranoia in its vitriol.
In claiming she has no power she is ingenuous. If studio executives are doing what they can to alter opinion of them you can be certain she is exercising the kind of power they dislike intensely … that is, to see themselves as others see them.
She’s a fresh wind blowing through Tinsel Town.
You are right, which you always are,but New Yorker has become a rag, not a mag. My bird certainly treats it as it deserves when I line his cage with it.
I hope your bird regards your whims and declarations of quality as highly as you do, Lorenzo. Surely, the magnificent and intelligent creature must recognize the irony of a blog comment serving as platform for keen insights on journalistic integrity.
“New Yorker has become a rag, not a mag.” Rarely has modern opinion been articulated in such a valuable and legitimate manner.
“You are right, which you always are” – the motto of bloggers everywhere
lorenzo jones – You subscribe and pay for a weekly magazine for the purpose of lining a bird’s cage? That’s dedication to your convictions!
So what we’ve learned this last week is Harvey Weinstein freely uses the C-word to refer to women AND he signed the petition to release child rapist Polanski. Nice.
Nikki isn’t powerful as an individual but the forum she provides for Hollywood insiders to speak their minds and the way she provokes and encourages their whistleblower contributions is certainly powerful.
Buttboy is a little homophobic Nikki.
buttboy is a lot homophobic…. you are using it in a ‘weak’ manner….
And a happy Sunday morning to you too! I almost choked on my bagel after I read your description of the New Yorker profile, laughing.
After I read the profile itself … well … the laughing to a big ha!
God reporting on this industry is so damn weird. From the historic Hoppers and Parsons, later Winchell … to the corporate press-release reprints of Variety and the Hollywood Reporter … to the laughable coverage in the large hometown newspaper owned by a nut from Chicago … now Nikki Speaks The Truth.
In the words of Charles Dillon Stengel … “Amazin'”
if there really is a cat hanging around while you work, that makes me happy.
This article is hilarious. I can’t wait to read this article. You are very funny.
Live forever, Nikki; sometimes you’re the funniest gal on the planet.
LMFAO!
Now THAT was good!
PC
Oh so right on so many counts. The NYer is one of the most dull reads ever. Agreed it is so thick with “wisdom & wit” that it’s a rock to read. Give me EW any week! As for the manipulation, I have to trust your insight into this – but to let all of those types – agents, PR, Weinstein and yourself being able to expunge so much from the article, then why on earth write a Hwood expose anyway??? And as for Peter Bart, go take your insight, roll it up real tight, and…well, U know Peter.
First off Nikki, a portrait by Los Angeles comic book legend JAIME HERNANDEZ under any circumstances is worthy of congratulations.
Under Tina Brown, the New Yorker lost its untouchable status and slowly began its now consistent descent to entertainment industry ass kissing. Forget Si Newhouse, what about Pauline Kael? She might have been a worthy opponent to the self-congratulating cheese lords of the now condensed, crusty remains of Hollywood.
There are very positive things happening in culture as the result of all the satanic, amnesiac excess of the past eight years – the collapse of east coast tastemakers the New Yorker and NY Times, the castration of Starbucks, death of celubutards, death of celebrity worship in general, my self-righteous illegal viewings of Transformers and Funny People over the internet, it’s all just starting…they’re going to lose….we’ll be there when they’re gone, just like the music business
That’s a Jaime Hernandez? Wow.
Nikki,
I loved this post. I was doing some writing and decided to take a break and read the latest from Deadline Hollywood! The New Yorker is a tired rag. I don’t think it’s seen a good day for the last ten years and is probably on the chopping block anyway with all the budget cuts.
Well done Nikki!
Mark
This story by the New Yorker is a perfect example of why the world needs people like you — and why sites like this one are the future of media.
I’ll be honest.. I tried reading that article but my eyes started to feel heavy so I quit. I’ll take your word for it.
Nikki, this is your finest hour, I want to have your babies.
You’re undoubtedly right about most things, Nikki, but not about the quality of the New Yorker. It’s not what it was in William Shawn’s day, but writers like George Packer are indespensible. And take a read of the recent Paul Theroux short story.
The truth about journalism is that when they write about you, whoever you are, you discover that journalism sucks.
At least the cartoon is magnificent. Thank you for this sunday laugh.
Harvey Weinstein not having the balls to call Nikki a cunt in print says more about Harvey than Nikki.
It’s true; being drawn by Jaime is a MUCH bigger honour then being profiled by the New Yorker.(After all, Jaime would NEVER have done an ass-kissing puff-piece on hatemonger Michael Savage like the NYer did recently).
You’re a magnificent cunt, Nikki. Cheers.
I just want to say that in the real world, no one knows who Nikki Finke is, or cares.
I think Harvey Weinstein does.
Sorry F, but EW has become just as rotten as The New Yorker.
In the P12 article on Polanski this week by Chris Nashawaty, He writes: “who has always played the role of a victim hounded by overzealous prosecutors” & follows with “Here are the facts:” & then leaves out anything about Judge Rittenband’s illegal talks with David Wells [an LA County Assistant DA not assigned to the case] & how Wells influenced him to overturn the settlement, which is why Polanski fled the country.
The prosecutors assigned to the case agreed with the sentence.
I’m not defending Polanski or any of his actions, I’m attacking EW & Nashawaty for pitifully incomplete reporting!
So Nikki, do you really have a gray cat?
one of those days I will come across a post of yours where you actually like what someone wrote or said about you. you know, a post where you just say thank you. then again…
Why so harsh on one of the best magazines out there? I agree the cartoons have seriously deteriorated. And the poems, when I dare read one, are pretentious and usually incomprehensible. Yes, too many ads now. Blah blah blah.
But, come on, the writing overall is outstanding. There are wonderful articles weekly.
And nobody can eviscerate a Hollywood ego like David Denby. But you’re a close second, Nikki.