What do you think?
Rate this book
Hard News: The Scandals at The New York Times and Their Meaning for American Media
On May 11, 2003, The New York Times devoted four pages of its Sunday paper to the deceptions of Jayson Blair, a mediocre former Times reporter who had made up stories, faked datelines, and plagiarized on a massive scale. The fallout from the Blair scandal rocked the Times to its core and revealed fault lines in a fractious newsroom that was already close to open revolt.
Staffers were furious–about the perception that management had given Blair more leeway because he was black, about the special treatment of favored correspondents, and most of all about the shoddy reporting that was infecting the most revered newspaper in the world. Within a month, Howell Raines, the imperious executive editor who had taken office less than a week before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001–and helped lead the paper to a record six Pulitzer Prizes for its coverage of the attacks–had been forced out of his job.
Having gained unprecedented access to the reporters who conducted the Times’s internal investigation, top newsroom executives, and dozens of Times editors, former Newsweek senior writer Seth Mnookin lets us read all about it–the story behind the biggest journalistic scam of our era and the profound implications of the scandal for the rapidly changing world of American journalism.
It’s a true tale that reads like Greek drama, with the most revered of American institutions attempting to overcome the crippling effects of a leader’s blinding narcissism and a low-level reporter’s sociopathic deceptions. Hard News will shape how we understand and judge the media for years to come.
Staffers were furious–about the perception that management had given Blair more leeway because he was black, about the special treatment of favored correspondents, and most of all about the shoddy reporting that was infecting the most revered newspaper in the world. Within a month, Howell Raines, the imperious executive editor who had taken office less than a week before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001–and helped lead the paper to a record six Pulitzer Prizes for its coverage of the attacks–had been forced out of his job.
Having gained unprecedented access to the reporters who conducted the Times’s internal investigation, top newsroom executives, and dozens of Times editors, former Newsweek senior writer Seth Mnookin lets us read all about it–the story behind the biggest journalistic scam of our era and the profound implications of the scandal for the rapidly changing world of American journalism.
It’s a true tale that reads like Greek drama, with the most revered of American institutions attempting to overcome the crippling effects of a leader’s blinding narcissism and a low-level reporter’s sociopathic deceptions. Hard News will shape how we understand and judge the media for years to come.
352 pages, Hardcover
First published October 1, 2004
15 people are currently reading
484 people want to read
About the author
Seth Mnookin
9 books39 followersSince 2005, Seth has been a contributing editor at Vanity Fair, where he’s written about the American media presence in Iraq, Bloomberg News, and Stephen Colbert. In 2002 and 2003, he was a senior writer at Newsweek, where he wrote the media column “Raw Copy” and also covered politics and popular culture.
He graduated from Harvard College in 1994 with a degree in History and Science, and was a 2004 Joan Shorenstein Fellow at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. A native of Newton, Massachusetts, he and his wife currently live in Cambridge with their seven-year-old dog, their two-year-old son, and their infant daughter.
He graduated from Harvard College in 1994 with a degree in History and Science, and was a 2004 Joan Shorenstein Fellow at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. A native of Newton, Massachusetts, he and his wife currently live in Cambridge with their seven-year-old dog, their two-year-old son, and their infant daughter.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
August 2, 2007
Completely compelling story. Fascinating look into the newspaper world. I do have to warn anyone ordering this through Amazon.com - because I ordered it, I was recommended a "Mr. Big FlexoFlesh Realistic Dildo (Mulato)" (I still have the screen grab because I thought it was so funny) - I couldn't tell if it was just because the word Hard was in the title, or if Amazon was insinuating a lifestyle suggestion for a woman ordering a non-fiction book about the New York Times. Either way they really need to work on their recommendations.
May 18, 2012
A clear, fair-minded, sharply written account of the 2001–2003 mismanagement of The New York Times and its consequences, including but not limited to the infamous behavior of one Jayson Blair. Mnookin uses the history of the paper (and of American journalism in general), firsthand interviews, and contemporary news accounts to give us a good context for understanding how the country's most respected paper, with all its money and resources, could be fooled and manipulated by a disturbed, charismatic sycophant. Mnookin breaks down the dysfunctional office politics, overtaxed editorial departments, and shameless cronyism that made it all possible. He also devotes plenty of space the reporters and editors at the Times who broke the Blair story, figured out just how much of his reporting had been invented or stolen, and ensured that the paper assumed accountability for the scandal. Neither a breathless tabloid account nor a dry report, this is a truly involving, important account of some of the worst and best things journalism of capable of.
July 18, 2010
I thought this was a book about the Jayson Blair scandal (in which it turned out that a Times reporter had not only plagiarized other reporters but also sometimes failed to even make it to the scene where he was supposedly reporting from). Then I thought it was about Howell Raines, the brilliant but flawed executive editor who tried to make the Times submit to his cult of personality. Finally I realized that the book is actually about how highly intelligent and well-meaning people can make decisions that cripple institutions. I'm making this book sound boring, but there's plenty of mystery and gossip here--and a minimum of "whither journalism?" pontificating. Good job, Seth Mnookin.
"Sometimes it's good to be a five-foot-tall black man." --Newspaper Guild representative Lena Williams, reassuring Blair that his distinctive appearance would make it easy to verify that he had been where he said he had been
"People would kill for these assignments, to get a chance to go and talk to and write about people around the country. And here was this guy that might not even have bothered to get on a plane? What for?" --Lorne Manly, acting media editor at the Times, commenting on some of the more than 600 stories Blair wrote for the paper
"When I got [to The New York Times:] I got down on my knees and thanked God that I didn't get hired here when I was in my twenties. I was not ready." --investigative reporter David Barstow, commenting on the fact that Jayson Blair began his full-time career at the Times
"It was like a horror movie where the killer is actually on the phone inside the house." --Barstow, on realizing that Blair was able to give precise visual descriptions of locales not because he had been there but because he had accessed the newspaper's internal photo-archiving system
". . . with the exception of Stephen Glass, a New Republic reporter who had completely fabricated a number of feature stories in the late 1990s, there weren't any comparable cases of widespread, almost sociopathic fraud. And The New Republic is a rarefied political weekly that reached a tenth of the Times's daily audience; Glass was writing feature stories about fringe groups he made up. . . . Blair was stitching his fraudulent accounts into some of the most heavily covered stories of the day. His 'reporting' had been featured on the front page time and time again. It was moved on the Times's newswires and reprinted by other papers around the country. The Times is the paper of record. What it writes is history. Blair had fabricated history." --Seth Mnookin
". . . the great lesson in American history is that the cover-up is worse than the crime. We wanted [the investigation of Blair:] to represent the fullest picture possible. I was astonished at what had happened to [the accounting firm:] Arthur Andersen--here's this great institution, and it is no more because of shredded documents. We wanted to make sure that didn't happen here." --Barstow
"Everybody felt under siege [under Raines:]. . . . When Thor is up there throwing thunderbolts, your happiest moments come when those thunderbolts hit somebody else." --former Times editorialist Roger Wilkins
"God is not going to stop making charismatic maniacs, so it falls to newspapers to figure out how to do a better job of apprehending them." --Nicholas Lemann, dean of Columbia's Graduate School of Journalism
"We caught it, and we decided to release it." --anonymous book editor, describing the rejection of Catch and Release, Howell Raines's proposal for a memoir in which he would ruminate on the Blair scandal, fly-fishing, and the nature of masculinity
"Sometimes it's good to be a five-foot-tall black man." --Newspaper Guild representative Lena Williams, reassuring Blair that his distinctive appearance would make it easy to verify that he had been where he said he had been
"People would kill for these assignments, to get a chance to go and talk to and write about people around the country. And here was this guy that might not even have bothered to get on a plane? What for?" --Lorne Manly, acting media editor at the Times, commenting on some of the more than 600 stories Blair wrote for the paper
"When I got [to The New York Times:] I got down on my knees and thanked God that I didn't get hired here when I was in my twenties. I was not ready." --investigative reporter David Barstow, commenting on the fact that Jayson Blair began his full-time career at the Times
"It was like a horror movie where the killer is actually on the phone inside the house." --Barstow, on realizing that Blair was able to give precise visual descriptions of locales not because he had been there but because he had accessed the newspaper's internal photo-archiving system
". . . with the exception of Stephen Glass, a New Republic reporter who had completely fabricated a number of feature stories in the late 1990s, there weren't any comparable cases of widespread, almost sociopathic fraud. And The New Republic is a rarefied political weekly that reached a tenth of the Times's daily audience; Glass was writing feature stories about fringe groups he made up. . . . Blair was stitching his fraudulent accounts into some of the most heavily covered stories of the day. His 'reporting' had been featured on the front page time and time again. It was moved on the Times's newswires and reprinted by other papers around the country. The Times is the paper of record. What it writes is history. Blair had fabricated history." --Seth Mnookin
". . . the great lesson in American history is that the cover-up is worse than the crime. We wanted [the investigation of Blair:] to represent the fullest picture possible. I was astonished at what had happened to [the accounting firm:] Arthur Andersen--here's this great institution, and it is no more because of shredded documents. We wanted to make sure that didn't happen here." --Barstow
"Everybody felt under siege [under Raines:]. . . . When Thor is up there throwing thunderbolts, your happiest moments come when those thunderbolts hit somebody else." --former Times editorialist Roger Wilkins
"God is not going to stop making charismatic maniacs, so it falls to newspapers to figure out how to do a better job of apprehending them." --Nicholas Lemann, dean of Columbia's Graduate School of Journalism
"We caught it, and we decided to release it." --anonymous book editor, describing the rejection of Catch and Release, Howell Raines's proposal for a memoir in which he would ruminate on the Blair scandal, fly-fishing, and the nature of masculinity
October 20, 2012
I literally could not put this book down. Seth Mnookin's Hard News is absolutely captivating. Even though we all know the outcome of Jason Blair's enormous fraud by now, Mnookin manages to make the tale so engrossing that you find yourself enmeshed in it right from the start. Mnookin's prose is like looking into a perfectly clear pool of water, and his honest, in-depth portrayal of the embattled Times manages to be both sympathetic and critical. I look forward to reading anything Mnookin chooses to write, but I hope he continues to tackle the biggest issue facing our ailing media today - telling the truth
February 18, 2010
If you're looking for an accessible book about the changing nature of the news industry, this isn't it. This book is pure inside baseball, a detailed retracing of what happened in the NYT newsroom in the years post-9/11, with particular attention to the Jayson Blair scandal. I enjoyed it a lot, but it's definitely not for everyone.
December 24, 2025
I was there. He gets a lot of stuff wrong, but I guess the gist is here. Take it with a grain of salt.
May 21, 2024
I do think Mnookin has some clumsy turns of phrase here and sometimes doesn't do enough in passages to dispel certain bad faith readings of the Jayson Blair scandal vis a vis affirmative action (in the name of journalistic integrity I guess, something Mnookin really appears to hold sacred; and tbf in the whole shape of the book it's pretty impossible to have the takeaway that Jayson Blair scandal is purely a consequence of minority initiatives).
All that being said, I had a blast reading this. Just a total pageturner, just the spectacular crumbling of an institution, as told exclusively by people who buy into the importance of said institution more than anyone else on the planet. It's surprisingly palatable to work your way through all of the moving pieces that paint the picture of Blair's shenanigans, or the factors of Raines's reign that led to it, OR the factors of the New York Times as an institution helmed by a magnate's dynasty that eventually led to Raines! When it hits full speed it's pretty much impossible to put down.
I eat this stuff up but Mnookin's construction of a complicated story is smart and extremely engaging. I just enjoy seeing it all laid out and saying bruh out loud.
All that being said, I had a blast reading this. Just a total pageturner, just the spectacular crumbling of an institution, as told exclusively by people who buy into the importance of said institution more than anyone else on the planet. It's surprisingly palatable to work your way through all of the moving pieces that paint the picture of Blair's shenanigans, or the factors of Raines's reign that led to it, OR the factors of the New York Times as an institution helmed by a magnate's dynasty that eventually led to Raines! When it hits full speed it's pretty much impossible to put down.
I eat this stuff up but Mnookin's construction of a complicated story is smart and extremely engaging. I just enjoy seeing it all laid out and saying bruh out loud.
January 6, 2024
Im Mai 2003 wurde die New York Time von einem Skandal erschüttert: Jayson Blair, einer ihrer Starreporter, hatte seine Geschichten nicht nur unzureichend recherchiert, es waren auch Plagiate und Fälschungen in ihnen entdeckt worden. Seth Mnookin zeigt in seinem Buch, wie es dazu kommen konnte, dass ein Mann die renommierte Zeitung so hinters Licht führen konnte.
Die Geschichte des Reporters, der seine Reportagen oft von zuhause geschrieben hat, klingt interessant. Es steht außer Frage, dass Jayson Blair die ihm vorgeworfenen Taten begangen hat. Die Frage ist, wie es dazu kommen konnte. Leider gibt das Buch nur unzureichend Antwort auf die Frage. Der Autor beschäftig sich für meinen Geschmack zu viel mit der Geschichte der Zeitung und der Menschen, die von Blairs Betrug betroffen waren, aber nicht genug mit Jayson Blair selbst. So kratzt die Geschichte nur an der Oberfläche, ohne wirklich in die Tiefe zu gehen.
Die Geschichte des Reporters, der seine Reportagen oft von zuhause geschrieben hat, klingt interessant. Es steht außer Frage, dass Jayson Blair die ihm vorgeworfenen Taten begangen hat. Die Frage ist, wie es dazu kommen konnte. Leider gibt das Buch nur unzureichend Antwort auf die Frage. Der Autor beschäftig sich für meinen Geschmack zu viel mit der Geschichte der Zeitung und der Menschen, die von Blairs Betrug betroffen waren, aber nicht genug mit Jayson Blair selbst. So kratzt die Geschichte nur an der Oberfläche, ohne wirklich in die Tiefe zu gehen.
November 13, 2014
Is this The New York TImes or Game of Thrones? After the relatively recent scandal of the firing of Jill Abramson, it seemed like this would be a good book to add to my list. It was branded as a book about the Jayson Blair saga--a young black reporter who was found to have plagiarized MANY of his articles for the NYT. However, the book was not quite that and it was really more as a story of the Howell Raines time as executive editor (during Blair's time there and would lead to his downfall).
At first the book begins with a look at the origins and background of the NYT as well as the Sulzberger family. This was not so interesting and I actually began to regret choosing this book. But once we get into the previous executive editors and then into the Raines tenure, things really begin to pick up.
Journalism is not my field, and my knowledge is limited to the reporters I follow on Twitter and a few interviews I had with much smaller, more niche outlets for non-press related jobs. After reading the general history of Raines' time there, I was starting to wonder if I was reading a journalism/Game of Thrones mashup. People don't die, but they get fired, shuttled into unwanted positions, reassigned, or quit all throughout the book. Much of this can be attributed to the nature of the business and the stress and tolls it can take on people. But HOLY COW the drama, backstabbing, etc. was bananas.
Things really pick up once the author gets into the Blair story and how he traces Blair's work coming under the spotlight really by an outside source (rather than say an internal audit of the NYT). Once they begin their investigation they see it's not as simple as plagiarism. Blair outright lied about meeting sources/interviewees, being on location, etc. Expenses made to rent cars, buy food, etc. were falsified. Blair basically swindled The New York Times for a significant amount of time.
In the end people were fired (including Raines, although Blair resigned before he could be fired), the NYT tried to move on. It was interesting to see that there *were* times when Blair's deceptions should have been spotted (falsified expenses with New York based restaurant receipts? NEVER meeting with the other reporters, photographers who supposedly worked with him?) and I wonder how the NYT handles this now.
And unfortunately, it appears the crazy newsroom culture continues. Mnookin talks a little bit about the immediate aftermath, such as Bill Keller rising as executive editor (he would later step down from the position but continue to write for the paper. Then he overstepped good taste by criticizing a cancer patient for how she chose to use social media. He left the NYT to start a new journalism venture) or future executive editor Jill Abramson (who would be unceremoniously be fired). One thing to note is that Abramson's firing would be rife with questions: was sexism at fault? I certainly couldn't say from this book, but I'll note that most of the players in this saga and people the author spoke to are apparently male. I don't know if it just happened that way, it's a reflection of journalist as a business, female employees just didn't work with Blair (or know about this story) or what. But I wouldn't be surprised if sexism AND the crazy newsroom of the NYT were both at fault.
A very timely read for me: As I read this both a Senate candidate and a reporter for Buzzfeed.com were found to have plagiarized previous work. It was an enjoyable read and ensures I do not want to work in journalism at all. Journalism students or anyone interested in the field or the NYT would probably enjoy this. I also have Mnookin's work about anti-vaccination people which I'll be looking forward to reading.
At first the book begins with a look at the origins and background of the NYT as well as the Sulzberger family. This was not so interesting and I actually began to regret choosing this book. But once we get into the previous executive editors and then into the Raines tenure, things really begin to pick up.
Journalism is not my field, and my knowledge is limited to the reporters I follow on Twitter and a few interviews I had with much smaller, more niche outlets for non-press related jobs. After reading the general history of Raines' time there, I was starting to wonder if I was reading a journalism/Game of Thrones mashup. People don't die, but they get fired, shuttled into unwanted positions, reassigned, or quit all throughout the book. Much of this can be attributed to the nature of the business and the stress and tolls it can take on people. But HOLY COW the drama, backstabbing, etc. was bananas.
Things really pick up once the author gets into the Blair story and how he traces Blair's work coming under the spotlight really by an outside source (rather than say an internal audit of the NYT). Once they begin their investigation they see it's not as simple as plagiarism. Blair outright lied about meeting sources/interviewees, being on location, etc. Expenses made to rent cars, buy food, etc. were falsified. Blair basically swindled The New York Times for a significant amount of time.
In the end people were fired (including Raines, although Blair resigned before he could be fired), the NYT tried to move on. It was interesting to see that there *were* times when Blair's deceptions should have been spotted (falsified expenses with New York based restaurant receipts? NEVER meeting with the other reporters, photographers who supposedly worked with him?) and I wonder how the NYT handles this now.
And unfortunately, it appears the crazy newsroom culture continues. Mnookin talks a little bit about the immediate aftermath, such as Bill Keller rising as executive editor (he would later step down from the position but continue to write for the paper. Then he overstepped good taste by criticizing a cancer patient for how she chose to use social media. He left the NYT to start a new journalism venture) or future executive editor Jill Abramson (who would be unceremoniously be fired). One thing to note is that Abramson's firing would be rife with questions: was sexism at fault? I certainly couldn't say from this book, but I'll note that most of the players in this saga and people the author spoke to are apparently male. I don't know if it just happened that way, it's a reflection of journalist as a business, female employees just didn't work with Blair (or know about this story) or what. But I wouldn't be surprised if sexism AND the crazy newsroom of the NYT were both at fault.
A very timely read for me: As I read this both a Senate candidate and a reporter for Buzzfeed.com were found to have plagiarized previous work. It was an enjoyable read and ensures I do not want to work in journalism at all. Journalism students or anyone interested in the field or the NYT would probably enjoy this. I also have Mnookin's work about anti-vaccination people which I'll be looking forward to reading.
June 16, 2014
I wanted to read all the details about the Jayson Blair scandal and how it could have happened at the premier newspaper in America. It took a hundred pages in before we got to it. I understand why we needed all the background, but there were so many names and issues to wade through. In fact the book was so full of briefly mentioned staffers that I kept wanting depth on the main players. Perhaps one could liken it to the scrolling down the nearly endless list of every single person who worked on a movie when you only wanted to know the names of the key players. At the end of the book I didn't really know what made Jayson Blair tick or Howell Raines, for that matter, either. Brief mentions of other writers who'd succumbed to unethical practices were mentioned without adding to the story. I finished the book, but it wasn't as satisfying as the promise before starting it.
July 15, 2014
great news-dork read. loved the postmodern writing (this book) about writing (NYT self reporting) about writing (Jayson Blair's fabrications). Also a great business story about the imperious leadership of Howell Raines. And caused me to take a step back and realize how much I love the NYT and how important it is to my life, and possibly to the world's life. Glad it's surviving in this brave new world.
April 26, 2008
The details of the story about Jayson Blair (what a kook!) in this book are reason enough to warrant its purchase, but the rest of it is top-notch as well. I'm hoping it becomes a movie one day. (book-rights pending)
May 16, 2011
A bit repetitive and chronologically difficult to follow. Mnookin does a great job of pulling readers into the story, making them sympathetic to the reporters and the conditions they were in in the year following 9/11.
July 30, 2013
A fascinating look at a little-seen world, at least for most of us. It is gripping-- I had a bit of trouble putting the book down. Don't be fooled-- this book, though about the newspaper business and the media as a whole-- is a page-turner.
May 6, 2014
Reminded of this book after watching a recent documentary on Jayson Blair in which Seth Mnookin, the author of Hard News, was interviewed. I remember really enjoying this book. It is a cautionary tale and a disaster dissection. I am inspired to reread it again soon.
February 22, 2015
I really liked how Seth Mnookin wrote this book. It kept things exciting and made it enjoyable to learn about journalism. It also showed me some of the back end process's of journalism, and made me not be so critical o fit as i used to.
October 31, 2007
Fascinating.
April 19, 2007
my favorite!
August 21, 2007
The best media book I've read in a very long while (although the writer's objectivity seems to wane down the stretch).
March 21, 2008
An interesting book. Much more interesting when you're working at the Times. I'd recommend it to anyone who's new here.
April 17, 2008
Fairly good book, not a terribly slow read. Interesting if you are interested in the news media, the New York Times, or Howell Raines.
June 18, 2008
I loved it because it was sensational. My editors say that it was exaggerated, but I have yet to read a more complete story of the Raines era at The Times.
January 13, 2009
Extremely good look into the problems of ethics that face even the most prestigious of news outlets.
January 21, 2009
Even the most hard-core newspaper has scandal and the New York Times has had plenty. The cover may look plain but this reads like a soap opera.....and that's a good thing.
February 16, 2013
I really enjoyed this read. At the time I was working as a journalist, but it doesn't seem like it was written to appeal to people outside the media.
Read
April 1, 2018Read this!
I found this book very interesting and well done. I have enjoyed all his books! Well research, referenced and thought out. Recommend to all. What else has he done?
I found this book very interesting and well done. I have enjoyed all his books! Well research, referenced and thought out. Recommend to all. What else has he done?
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews