What do you think?
Rate this book
Yours in Truth: A Personal Portrait of Ben Bradlee, Legendary Editor of The Washington Post
“I hope we’re as good friends when you finish your book as we are now,” Ben Bradlee, the legendary former executive editor of The Washington Post, told Jeff Himmelman in March 2010. “But I don’t give a [expletive deleted] what you write about me.”
So begins Ben, an intimate portrait of a fixture on the American scene for nearly half a century—close friend to John F. Kennedy, the center of D.C. social life, and a crusty, charismatic editor whose decisions at the helm of the Post during Watergate changed the course of history. Granted unprecedented access to Bradlee and his colleagues, friends, and private files, Himmelman draws on never-before-seen internal Post memos, correspondence, personal photographs, and private interviews to trace the full arc of Bradlee’s forty-five year career—from his early days as a press attaché in postwar Paris through the Pentagon Papers, Richard Nixon’s resignation, the Janet Cooke fabrication scandal, and beyond. Himmelman also unearths a series of surprises—about Watergate, and about Bradlee’s private relationships with Post owner Katharine Graham and President Kennedy and his wife, Jackie.
“Don’t feel you have to protect me,” Bradlee told Himmelman whenever the reporting started to strike close to home. “Follow your nose.” Those instructions, familiar to any Post reporter, have resulted in this thoughtfully constructed and beautifully written account of a magnetic man whose career has come to define the golden age of newspapers in America, when the press battled for its freedom—and won.
So begins Ben, an intimate portrait of a fixture on the American scene for nearly half a century—close friend to John F. Kennedy, the center of D.C. social life, and a crusty, charismatic editor whose decisions at the helm of the Post during Watergate changed the course of history. Granted unprecedented access to Bradlee and his colleagues, friends, and private files, Himmelman draws on never-before-seen internal Post memos, correspondence, personal photographs, and private interviews to trace the full arc of Bradlee’s forty-five year career—from his early days as a press attaché in postwar Paris through the Pentagon Papers, Richard Nixon’s resignation, the Janet Cooke fabrication scandal, and beyond. Himmelman also unearths a series of surprises—about Watergate, and about Bradlee’s private relationships with Post owner Katharine Graham and President Kennedy and his wife, Jackie.
“Don’t feel you have to protect me,” Bradlee told Himmelman whenever the reporting started to strike close to home. “Follow your nose.” Those instructions, familiar to any Post reporter, have resulted in this thoughtfully constructed and beautifully written account of a magnetic man whose career has come to define the golden age of newspapers in America, when the press battled for its freedom—and won.
512 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2012
79 people are currently reading
408 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews
December 18, 2018
Fantastické. Pre novinárov povinné.
Najlepšie údery: https://dennikn.sk/1328010/zivotopis-...
Najlepšie údery: https://dennikn.sk/1328010/zivotopis-...
June 17, 2012
Like many people, my perception of legendary Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee comes from Jason Robards' Oscar-winning performance in All The President's Men.
Jeff Himmelman deftly contrasts that view with the very-real personality conflicts between Bradlee and his top editors during the Watergate coverage.
He points out that Managing Editor Howard Simons'close friendship with Bradlee disintegrated following the movie, which marginalized Simons' critical role in managing carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward.
For example, it was Simons not Bradlee who said the paper should stay with the boys regardless of relentless pressure from the White House. And Simons never suggested the National Desk take over the story.
Himmelman notes that Bradlee never really tries to make Simons feel better about the discrepencies.
He also uncovered evidence that Woodward and Bernstein might have used an interview with a Watergate grand juror in their coverage - in defiance of the law. And that Bradlee might have doubted Woodward's Deep Throat source.
There's a fascinating chapter in the book where Himmelman describes Woodward trying desperately to convince him against using this material in the book. That puts some perspective on the way Woodward works, I believe.
There's also a piercing look at why Bradlee's team failed to uncover Janet Cooke's fabricated story about an eight-year-old heroin addict in 1981.
Himmelman claims all of the editors - Bradlee, Woodward (then city editor) and others were too caught up in "Holy Shit" stories to catch obvious fabrications in her article. He also agreed with assertions the mostly-white editors really had no idea what Black Washington was really like.
Bradlee in Himmelman's portrait is no saint.
He is human, and despite his shortcomings, is still one of the finest newspapermen ever produced in America.
Well worth reading.
Jeff Himmelman deftly contrasts that view with the very-real personality conflicts between Bradlee and his top editors during the Watergate coverage.
He points out that Managing Editor Howard Simons'close friendship with Bradlee disintegrated following the movie, which marginalized Simons' critical role in managing carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward.
For example, it was Simons not Bradlee who said the paper should stay with the boys regardless of relentless pressure from the White House. And Simons never suggested the National Desk take over the story.
Himmelman notes that Bradlee never really tries to make Simons feel better about the discrepencies.
He also uncovered evidence that Woodward and Bernstein might have used an interview with a Watergate grand juror in their coverage - in defiance of the law. And that Bradlee might have doubted Woodward's Deep Throat source.
There's a fascinating chapter in the book where Himmelman describes Woodward trying desperately to convince him against using this material in the book. That puts some perspective on the way Woodward works, I believe.
There's also a piercing look at why Bradlee's team failed to uncover Janet Cooke's fabricated story about an eight-year-old heroin addict in 1981.
Himmelman claims all of the editors - Bradlee, Woodward (then city editor) and others were too caught up in "Holy Shit" stories to catch obvious fabrications in her article. He also agreed with assertions the mostly-white editors really had no idea what Black Washington was really like.
Bradlee in Himmelman's portrait is no saint.
He is human, and despite his shortcomings, is still one of the finest newspapermen ever produced in America.
Well worth reading.
July 5, 2013
I have to say, as someone who has worked at the Washington Post for 14 years and counting, it sometimes feels like it's impossible to get out from under the legend and events recounted in this book. (My proximity to the people and dramas in "Yours in Truth" is minimal; I live and work several layers down from this part of the atmosphere.)
Curiosity pulled me in anyhow and I was pleasantly surprised by the honest and seeking nature of this book, the way it pulls back, the way the reader gets to discover layers to Bradlee's personality (and those closest to him) alongside the author, rooting around through archives, letters and interviews, revisiting the oldest yarns with a fresh eye, and partaking in some rarefied air. It all felt very real, occasionally heartbreaking, ultimately tender and well-told. And it passed my ultimate test for anything written about The Post: Have I learned things I didn't already know? YES.
Curiosity pulled me in anyhow and I was pleasantly surprised by the honest and seeking nature of this book, the way it pulls back, the way the reader gets to discover layers to Bradlee's personality (and those closest to him) alongside the author, rooting around through archives, letters and interviews, revisiting the oldest yarns with a fresh eye, and partaking in some rarefied air. It all felt very real, occasionally heartbreaking, ultimately tender and well-told. And it passed my ultimate test for anything written about The Post: Have I learned things I didn't already know? YES.
December 28, 2017
Editor Ben Bradlee led the Washington Post through turbulent political times. Bradlee and publisher Kay Graham took the Post from a local paper to national status - a rival of the celebrated New York Times. Most of us are familiar with the Pentagon Papers and Watergate. This author focuses on what transpired inside the Post during those challenging times. Himmelman dug up scores of old boxes with correspondence, memos, and notes by Bradlee. They reveal a man who was brash, profane, charismatic, and focused on the newspaper business. "Dear Asshole" is how he begins a letter to one ornery critic. Ben Bradlee was larger than life and much loved, in retrospect, during his years editing the Washington Post. The book is full of gossip which I am guilty of enjoying.
September 25, 2012
"Yours in Truth" covers the career of Ben Bradlee, the legendary executive editor of the Washington Post. The span of Bradlee's career, which included the high of Watergate as well as the low of a scandal at the Post which occurred years later, provides a veritable seesaw of journalistic drama. Added to the mix are Bradlee's status in D.C. social circles, his complex personal life, his close friendship with JFK and Jackie, his professional dealings with reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, and his unique relationship with Post owner, Katherine Graham.
The title "Your's in Truth" comes from the valediction (the closing) of one of Bradlee's letters and speaks to the character of the man, his integrity and his style. Having worked for Ben Bradlee as well as for Bob Woodward at different times, Himmelman had a close relationship to both men. There are portions of the book where Himmelman writes of discussions with Bradlee and with Woodward about the book as it was being written. Himmelman gives the reader a sense that he is breaking the fourth wall, so to speak, including the reader in his process and revealing some of the tensions and pressures that he encountered - primarily from Woodward.
Because he was granted unlimited access to archives, personal files and documents, some of which had never been revealed before, Himmelman was able to unearth some surprises. There is close coverage of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein (dubbed Woodstein by another editor at the Post) and how they handled their investigation. This coverage was too close for comfort in at least one case. Woodward tried hard to convince Himmelman to exclude information from the book. Bradlee, on the other hand, told Himmelman what he always said to his reporters, "Follow your nose!" and "Don't feel you need to protect me." Indeed, there was some unflattering truth to be told about Bradlee. Himmelman did his job. However, through the whole of the story, Himmelman's admiration for Bradlee is clear and seems well deserved.
The structure of the book, which was very loosely chronological, was a bit of a downfall, in my opinion. In at least one case (dealing with Bradlee's wives) threads were raised and then dropped only to be raised again and more fully developed fairly late in the game. In his quest to be thorough (or perhaps sensational) Himmelman included some information that felt extraneous - particularly some of his revelations about the Kennedys. Though I'm sure that information would be of interest to many, to me it felt like padding. As a result, the book felt disjointed at times. I enjoyed finishing it as much as I enjoyed actually reading it. But, I'm very glad that I did and would recommend it! I'll always appreciate the afterglow of information from this rather unique book. It will stay with me.
Much of the strength of the book comes from the insight it provides into the inner workings of the Post at it's highest and lowest moments, but the real story is about the professional life and character of Ben Bradlee whose charismatic style, leadership and willingness to speak truth to power, during one of our nation's most tumultuous times, was, most certainly, the stuff of legend.
The title "Your's in Truth" comes from the valediction (the closing) of one of Bradlee's letters and speaks to the character of the man, his integrity and his style. Having worked for Ben Bradlee as well as for Bob Woodward at different times, Himmelman had a close relationship to both men. There are portions of the book where Himmelman writes of discussions with Bradlee and with Woodward about the book as it was being written. Himmelman gives the reader a sense that he is breaking the fourth wall, so to speak, including the reader in his process and revealing some of the tensions and pressures that he encountered - primarily from Woodward.
Because he was granted unlimited access to archives, personal files and documents, some of which had never been revealed before, Himmelman was able to unearth some surprises. There is close coverage of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein (dubbed Woodstein by another editor at the Post) and how they handled their investigation. This coverage was too close for comfort in at least one case. Woodward tried hard to convince Himmelman to exclude information from the book. Bradlee, on the other hand, told Himmelman what he always said to his reporters, "Follow your nose!" and "Don't feel you need to protect me." Indeed, there was some unflattering truth to be told about Bradlee. Himmelman did his job. However, through the whole of the story, Himmelman's admiration for Bradlee is clear and seems well deserved.
The structure of the book, which was very loosely chronological, was a bit of a downfall, in my opinion. In at least one case (dealing with Bradlee's wives) threads were raised and then dropped only to be raised again and more fully developed fairly late in the game. In his quest to be thorough (or perhaps sensational) Himmelman included some information that felt extraneous - particularly some of his revelations about the Kennedys. Though I'm sure that information would be of interest to many, to me it felt like padding. As a result, the book felt disjointed at times. I enjoyed finishing it as much as I enjoyed actually reading it. But, I'm very glad that I did and would recommend it! I'll always appreciate the afterglow of information from this rather unique book. It will stay with me.
Much of the strength of the book comes from the insight it provides into the inner workings of the Post at it's highest and lowest moments, but the real story is about the professional life and character of Ben Bradlee whose charismatic style, leadership and willingness to speak truth to power, during one of our nation's most tumultuous times, was, most certainly, the stuff of legend.
July 7, 2012
Jeff Himmelman has raised a mini-storm in Washington and New York among the journalistic elites who can't believe he betrayed the two great icons of modern journalism, Ben Bradlee and Bob Woodward by writing the truth. No one has claimed that Himmelman fudged the facts, only that he should have protected Bradlee (and Bradlee's wife, Sally Quinn) and Woodward by not including things that might make them look bad.
None of what Himmelman wrote is actually that negative about the great gods of journalism. There was an instance he found where Woodward lied about his sources in his Watergate stories and a letter that Bradlee wrote but never sent in which he questioned the motives of his wife, Ms. Quinn. Neither "betrayal" was any great shock to anyone who has followed the careers of Bradley, Quinn and Woodward. I lost any confidence that Woodward could be relied upon as a "truth teller," in the book, "Veil" about William Casey's time at the CIA in which he quotes Casey on his death bed. There were guards at the door to Casey's hospital room 24/7 who denied that Woodward was ever in the room. It didn't pass my "smell" test that the hospital staff, the guards and the Casey family would allow Woodward into the room. There are many other instances of Woodward reporting, particularly his account of the Supreme Court in "The Brethren" that have not passed my "smell test."
Himmelman's book is not a chronologically organized book of biography of Ben Bradlee, but more of a character study. Many of the facts about Bradlee were already known, since Bradlee had already written an autobiography (which I have not read.) Himmelman shows a charismatic man whom many people (and I count Himmelman among them) adored. But he was not exactly a genius, he didn't have the attention span for that. His gift seems to have been to find good reporters, give them a chance to produce and then support them to the hilt.
I got this book in a Good Reads giveaway. It is not a "great" book, but it is a very good book, one that entertained and informed me. I recommend it for people who are interested in journalism and politics. I don't think I would want Jeff Himmelman for a friend though.
None of what Himmelman wrote is actually that negative about the great gods of journalism. There was an instance he found where Woodward lied about his sources in his Watergate stories and a letter that Bradlee wrote but never sent in which he questioned the motives of his wife, Ms. Quinn. Neither "betrayal" was any great shock to anyone who has followed the careers of Bradley, Quinn and Woodward. I lost any confidence that Woodward could be relied upon as a "truth teller," in the book, "Veil" about William Casey's time at the CIA in which he quotes Casey on his death bed. There were guards at the door to Casey's hospital room 24/7 who denied that Woodward was ever in the room. It didn't pass my "smell" test that the hospital staff, the guards and the Casey family would allow Woodward into the room. There are many other instances of Woodward reporting, particularly his account of the Supreme Court in "The Brethren" that have not passed my "smell test."
Himmelman's book is not a chronologically organized book of biography of Ben Bradlee, but more of a character study. Many of the facts about Bradlee were already known, since Bradlee had already written an autobiography (which I have not read.) Himmelman shows a charismatic man whom many people (and I count Himmelman among them) adored. But he was not exactly a genius, he didn't have the attention span for that. His gift seems to have been to find good reporters, give them a chance to produce and then support them to the hilt.
I got this book in a Good Reads giveaway. It is not a "great" book, but it is a very good book, one that entertained and informed me. I recommend it for people who are interested in journalism and politics. I don't think I would want Jeff Himmelman for a friend though.
August 12, 2012
Biographies often have a way of being very dry, but not Yours In Truth. Perhaps because the author inserts himself into the life of Bradlee, it reads more like a memoir and engages. I am not sure if that's because I've met many of the characters or that Watergate is still a relatively new subject for me since I was born after it happened. But this is a very, very well-written book.
I am not sure if as much length should have gone into what was being written. The controversy surrounding the book stems from Himmelman's case to show that Woodward may have embellished some minor details when it comes to Deep Throat, which would then suggest if he would embellish those what else is he embellishing. I don't really care if the flower pot was moved or not. This is not the first time Woodward's reporting is questioned. Perhaps it was interesting to see how Woodward responds in these cases, especially when the questioning comes from Bradlee, but not enough to warrant page after page of this.
The other big revelation comes that Bernstein talked to a grand juror in the Watergate case, when the two swore they never talked to any jurors because it's illegal. Knowing Bernstein's spotty career and less than moral ways with woman, I am just not all that surprised to hear that he would lie about this.
What this book does so well is to humanize someone that appears to be untouchable, and the sacrifices he paid for it. Himmelman does not shy away from talking about Bradlee's sordid family life or marriages gone astray. There has to be some price for this greatness and Himmelman pulls the curtain back on that.
It's hard to write a biography on someone who's already written their memoirs and is extensively interviewed. So the the exciting and new material is supposed to be Himmelman's Watergate revelations, which don't have that much to do with Bradlee and aren't really game changers. I believe that's probably the only and biggest flaw of the book.
I am not sure if as much length should have gone into what was being written. The controversy surrounding the book stems from Himmelman's case to show that Woodward may have embellished some minor details when it comes to Deep Throat, which would then suggest if he would embellish those what else is he embellishing. I don't really care if the flower pot was moved or not. This is not the first time Woodward's reporting is questioned. Perhaps it was interesting to see how Woodward responds in these cases, especially when the questioning comes from Bradlee, but not enough to warrant page after page of this.
The other big revelation comes that Bernstein talked to a grand juror in the Watergate case, when the two swore they never talked to any jurors because it's illegal. Knowing Bernstein's spotty career and less than moral ways with woman, I am just not all that surprised to hear that he would lie about this.
What this book does so well is to humanize someone that appears to be untouchable, and the sacrifices he paid for it. Himmelman does not shy away from talking about Bradlee's sordid family life or marriages gone astray. There has to be some price for this greatness and Himmelman pulls the curtain back on that.
It's hard to write a biography on someone who's already written their memoirs and is extensively interviewed. So the the exciting and new material is supposed to be Himmelman's Watergate revelations, which don't have that much to do with Bradlee and aren't really game changers. I believe that's probably the only and biggest flaw of the book.
June 30, 2012
This was a long, tough read for me, not because the book was poorly written, but because I don't have enough background knowledge of Watergate or the Janet Cooke scandal. I won this book as a Goodreads giveaway and I'm very glad that I did. I found Ben Bradlee's life as editor of the Washington Post interesting and informative. I was a small child when Watergate happened; I clearly remember Nixon's wave from the door of the plane, but that's really all I remember. Because of this, I had a difficult time following the story of Bradlee's involvement in exposing the scandal. I think it would have been helpful for me if the book had been written in chronological order rather than skipping around from the 1950's through the 1990's. For example, Himmelman started using the name "Woodstein" without explaining that it was a combination of Woodward and Bernstein. For someone reading this book with little background knowledge, this kind of thing was particularly confusing. The author also referred to the Janet Cooke scandal throughout the book. Referring to it before talking about it was confusing to me. Himmelman clearly supposed that the reader would already know about the scandal and didn't think it was necessary to define it before referring to it. I realize that the reader of a biographical work would normally have some knowledge of the subject before choosing to read the book. Therefore, although it was a bit difficult for me to follow, I'm sure it would be much easier for someone with extensive knowledge of Bradlee and his importance to history at The Post.
August 21, 2012
I received this book from the publisher as a Goodread's giveaway and before it arrived I read an article that was critical of the author for betraying friendships. Neither one of those circumstances should have any effect on my evaluation of the book, but they do, at least a little bit. I started the book a little prejudiced against the author, anticipating the parts that I might find unethical. At the same time the book was free, a gift. It's harder to criticize a gift. I tried to ignore what was extraneous and perhaps I was successful - at any rate I landed somewhere in the middle in my judgements. The reasons to award the book stars include Bradlee himself. No author could make this man uninteresting. I didn't always like him throughout the book and I didn't always agree with him, but I admired his strength and his ethics, and he often made me laugh out loud. Another reason for stars is the background material that was made available to Himmelman. Rarely does a biographer have access to this many personal records that seem not to have been edited at all. Personal notes between Bradlee and Katherine Graham are numerous and touching. All of this makes Himmelman's book worth reading although it is not that well-written. He uses vernacular phrases such as -We then sat down and shot the shit - not as quotes but as narrative. And way too much of the book is about Himmelman himself and his reaction to events. None-the-less he is comprehensive and readable while leading us through Watergate and the Janet Cooke affair. The book reminds us of what newspapers used to be like.
September 22, 2012
First, I'll admit I did not know who Ben Bradlee was when I entered this giveaway. However, biographies and memoirs are my favorite genre of books. Himmelman's presentation of this prestigious, personable Washington Post Editor was certainly no disappointment. It was thrilling to get the underlying "scoop" about politics and Washington DC activities from such a knowledgable source. This culmination of Bradlee's professional life was well-documented with a variety of material types including interviews, government documents, articles, private correspondence and personal photographs and even uncovered memos.The text was well-written in an interesting historical presentation, very thought-provoking. Bradley was at the center of editing during a time in our history when newspapers were their all time influence on public sentiment. He was himself very influential during Watergate, Nixon's resignation, and The Pentagon Papers. He was well-liked and known to be truthful but quite direct in his manner. For example, when he advised Himmelman how to write about. His life, he instructed him to say anything he wanted about him and to dig up everything he could find out. He was very influential getting the press more free speech as in the constitution.
I wish history textbooks could be as interesting as Himmelman's biography of Ben Bradlee.
I wish history textbooks could be as interesting as Himmelman's biography of Ben Bradlee.
July 19, 2012
I want to thank those of Random House who donate books to giveaways. I am sincere in this.
I love biographies of interesting and great individuals. However this was not one of them.
If Ben Bradlee was such a great Journalist, why is his vocabulary so limited that he had to very frequently resort to profanity to express himself.
He was such a negative reporter! He seemed to degrade everyone and everything he could.
He couldn't speak civilly to many of those he responded to. True greatness gets the job done but with a little 'class'.
It is people like him, just as with crooked political leaders, that has degraded our country.
With all its' problems, America is still the greatest country in the world. If you don't believe it, live among those poverty-ridden, suppressed people in other countries.
The author jumped through years so sporadically that is also lost any interest the reader might have had. It was very unorganized documentationsI won this book and am very glad I did not purchase it.
I love biographies of interesting and great individuals. However this was not one of them.
If Ben Bradlee was such a great Journalist, why is his vocabulary so limited that he had to very frequently resort to profanity to express himself.
He was such a negative reporter! He seemed to degrade everyone and everything he could.
He couldn't speak civilly to many of those he responded to. True greatness gets the job done but with a little 'class'.
It is people like him, just as with crooked political leaders, that has degraded our country.
With all its' problems, America is still the greatest country in the world. If you don't believe it, live among those poverty-ridden, suppressed people in other countries.
The author jumped through years so sporadically that is also lost any interest the reader might have had. It was very unorganized documentationsI won this book and am very glad I did not purchase it.
August 16, 2012
I couldn't put this book down. I loved the way it was written; very personal, rich in source material ( the author had access to boxes and boxes of Ben Bradlee's private correspondence) and was a house guest for months, which gave him another rare view of the subject.
Apparently the author, Jeff Himmelman has ruffled some feathers with some of the details that he provides in this book. Ben Bradlee was nothing if not a "truth teller" and encouraged Himmelman to go where the information took him. I think that he has, even if it has cost him a personal relationship with his former boss Bob Woodward and Sally Quinn.
Biographies typically feel so "removed from the subject". This book put me right in the heart of things and I felt like I understood what it was like to be in the Post newsroom, that I understood the very personal relationship between editor and publisher that Ben had with Kay and that by the end of the book that I understood the drive Ben had to be the best, beat the Times, tell the truth and do it all with his very unique style. Well Done Jeff Himmelman.
Apparently the author, Jeff Himmelman has ruffled some feathers with some of the details that he provides in this book. Ben Bradlee was nothing if not a "truth teller" and encouraged Himmelman to go where the information took him. I think that he has, even if it has cost him a personal relationship with his former boss Bob Woodward and Sally Quinn.
Biographies typically feel so "removed from the subject". This book put me right in the heart of things and I felt like I understood what it was like to be in the Post newsroom, that I understood the very personal relationship between editor and publisher that Ben had with Kay and that by the end of the book that I understood the drive Ben had to be the best, beat the Times, tell the truth and do it all with his very unique style. Well Done Jeff Himmelman.
October 26, 2013
This book, in combination with Bradlee's autobiography " A Good Life", provided me with a kind of reading experience that I particularly relish: the Rashomon-like ability to view certain events from more than one viewpoint. (Note: my first such experience was provided by a laudatory Ben Franklin bio and a muckraking one. Ooh, Ben, we hardly knew ye!)
Bradlee himself was quite forthcoming in a warts-and-all fashion; Himmelman gives us some extra information and some different emphases that expand our understanding. He fully explains his procedure in working with Bradlee, and he seems to me to have been cautious and fair minded. Adulatory too, to some extent-- but he doesn't hide that, either.
And frankly, I think that of I worked with Ben Bralee, I'd wind up feeling a little swoons about the guy. Big personality, great raconteur. Both the biography and the autibiography are good reads.
Bradlee himself was quite forthcoming in a warts-and-all fashion; Himmelman gives us some extra information and some different emphases that expand our understanding. He fully explains his procedure in working with Bradlee, and he seems to me to have been cautious and fair minded. Adulatory too, to some extent-- but he doesn't hide that, either.
And frankly, I think that of I worked with Ben Bralee, I'd wind up feeling a little swoons about the guy. Big personality, great raconteur. Both the biography and the autibiography are good reads.
June 13, 2015
*I received this book free through a goodreads giveaway*
A long time ago. Not sure why I waited so long to read this book. I loved it! A fascinating portrait of Ben Bradlee and the Washington Post and what he went through over decades as editor. The Watergate time was fascinating. The Janet Cooke issue was fascinating. This is all a little bit before my time so it was kind of new to me (but not totally - I have seen All the President's Men). Very interesting man. My only gripe is that I thought the retirement section ran a touch long but that is about it. Otherwise, I was riveted through the entire book! Well worth reading!
A long time ago. Not sure why I waited so long to read this book. I loved it! A fascinating portrait of Ben Bradlee and the Washington Post and what he went through over decades as editor. The Watergate time was fascinating. The Janet Cooke issue was fascinating. This is all a little bit before my time so it was kind of new to me (but not totally - I have seen All the President's Men). Very interesting man. My only gripe is that I thought the retirement section ran a touch long but that is about it. Otherwise, I was riveted through the entire book! Well worth reading!
July 15, 2012
Although not a biography in the strictest sense of the word, this book does cover the most important events in Bradlee's professional life (i.e., the Pentagon Papers, Watergate, and the Janet Cooke scandal) as well as his relationships with Katherine Graham, Woodward and Berstein, President and Mrs. Kennedy, and his third wife, Sally Quinn. I've been interested in Mr. Bradlee since seeing "All the President's Men" years ago - so if you're a fan of that movie, Watergate in general, journalism, or the interal workings/politics associated with a large newspaper (in this case the Washington Post), you will probably enjoy this book, too.
July 10, 2012
This was one of the free books I received thru Goodreads from Random House. I enjoy biographies but they are usually the type of books you can put down and get back to when you are in the mood. Surprisingly this book was one I couldn't stop reading. Bravo to Jeff Himmelman for giving us an
honest view of Ben Bradless and his history with the Washington Post. Having lived thru Watergate
and having watched it on television day after day it brought back a lot of memories. Best line in the book "The truth was looking for a way out."
honest view of Ben Bradless and his history with the Washington Post. Having lived thru Watergate
and having watched it on television day after day it brought back a lot of memories. Best line in the book "The truth was looking for a way out."
February 16, 2015
I didn't think I could like a biography where the author is so clearly in awe of the subject. But this is probably my favorite book I've read this year. To start, Bradlee is one of the most interesting people you could write about, and his time at the Post is full of good episodes. He's easily quotable and there's lots of dialogue. But Himmelman doesn't pull his punches either, especially with Bob Woodward and Sally Quinn. So the book ends up being part conversation, part investigation, and part veneration. It makes for an entertaining mix.
June 9, 2012
I won this book through firstreads. I really wanted to read this book about Ben Bradlee because my son has the same syndrome (VCFS) as Mr. Bradlee's son, Quinn, has. However, I became facinated with learning about Watergate and Ben's life. This was also an interesting read because of all the insight about Mr. Bradlee through correspondence to and from him. I've also read Quinn Bradlee's book written by the same author and I really loved it as well.
June 23, 2012
I know this is going to sound crazy but I had no idea who Ben Bradlee was until I called my mom and asked. Once I got into the book I realized I did know who he was as the editor of The Washington Post and legendary journalist. This is an amazing account of his life and journeys within I am sending this book to my mom so she can read it also. I learned a lot about his personality and his I don't care what people think about me attitude. I won this copy here on Goodreads.
Read
August 29, 2013So far I love this book about Ben Bradlee. It captures the history of his time, and his amazingly powerful personality. Best of all, it's a unique narrative for a biography, incorporating the author's process, his relationship with Brandlee, and the story itself. I recommend for people who love biography, journalism, and memoir.
July 30, 2012
I won Yours In Truth on Goodreads first read giveaways and enjoy Jeff Himmelman look at Ben Bradlee
life,from the highs of Watergate, to the lows of Jimmy'S World. Mr. Himmelman shows us how Bradlee
is just human after all and how he was able to recover and keep the truth coming.
A good summer read.
life,from the highs of Watergate, to the lows of Jimmy'S World. Mr. Himmelman shows us how Bradlee
is just human after all and how he was able to recover and keep the truth coming.
A good summer read.
August 12, 2012
A much more balanced view of Ben Bradlee than I was expecting and one that might surprise some family members who were expecting the worst. It tells the story of an important and groundbreaking time in journalism and of a man who had much to do w/ revolutionizing reporting and the newspaper business.
January 30, 2018
I think this book gives a good characterization of Bradlee. The descriptions of the circumstances surrounding Watergate and the Janet Cooke fraud are well documented and, I think, told without varnish. However, there are only oblique references to the Pentagon Papers. With all of the materials the author had at his disposal, I would have appreciated a section on that. Enjoyed this read.
September 14, 2018
A captivating account of Ben Bradlee's life and his career as an editor at the Washington Post. He transformed the newspaper from local to being one of the important national papers in the US, and was involved in bringing light to the Pentagon papers and Watergate among others. A wonderful book and highly recommended!
October 25, 2018
Amazing portrait of a man just as he was, and is, simply spectacular portrayal of Bradlee and his times. Was he perfect, no. Was he honest, most likely. The author is obviously enamored by the legend of Bradlee, and the man, and by the end of the book the reader is, also, if the are honest with themselves. I was.
July 17, 2012
I won this book from a FirstReads giveaway.
As a journalist and media-savvy reader, I expected a bit more from this book. After all, Bradlee is a legend. I liked it, but I didn't love it.
It moves kind of slow at points.
As a journalist and media-savvy reader, I expected a bit more from this book. After all, Bradlee is a legend. I liked it, but I didn't love it.
It moves kind of slow at points.
Read
June 22, 2012A biography of Ben Bradlee and his time at the Washington Post. Highlighting the Watergate stories from documents filed away for years. This author had Ben Bradlee's permission to go through everything. Warts and all
August 29, 2012
When I come back in my next life, I want to be Ben Bradlee. If you just collected his quotes from this book, you'd have words to live by. Very balanced book. Wonderful views of Katharine Graham. Great perspectives on Watergate from the inside of the Post. Really enjoyable reading!
March 16, 2013
Well worth reading just for the copies of Bradlee's personal letters that are sprinkled throughout the book: "Dear Asshole," etc. I love this guy--so crazily honest! Also has a pretty compelling juxtaposition of the Watergate story and the "Jimmy's World" debacle.
January 23, 2018
``Follow your nose” said the editor, and so did the biographer. This unpolished portrait of the WaPo editor is peculiar in that it successfully penetrates thick layers of mythos, romanticism and false reverence to get to the subject-in-itself. The account of the Watergate is glistening.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews