It is a familiar tale in the news organization. A challenging-charging investigative reporter bangs on doors, functions relentlessly and resourcefully, and turns in a draft, psyched to see his scoop in print.
The reporter’s editors say the story needs a lot more perform. That doesn’t go over perfectly. Shouted accusations ensue in conferences around the coming weeks and months.
This kind of acrimonious sausage-creating most usually stays in-home. Now, an occasion has burst into the open up with the publication this week of Paul Pringle’s “Bad Town: Peril and Electricity in the City of Angels.” (An excerpt ran final week in The Hollywood Reporter)
The book chronicles Pringle’s work at the Los Angeles Periods uncovering wrongdoing at the University of Southern California — specifically the story of a medical university dean located in a hotel home in the enterprise of a youthful lady who experienced overdosed on meth.
In media circles, the a lot more explosive element of Pringle’s e-book is an accusation that his editors tried to destroy the tale, then weakened it by deleting some of his best content, just before it was ultimately published a few months later on.
Not so, claims Marc Duvoisin, then the