Weinsteins Want Miramax Name Back 
'Saw 3D' vs 'Paranormal Activity 2' Battle … 
TV TUG OF WAR: It's Ellen vs Simon, And … 
Robert De Niro Returns To CAA From WME; Jane … 
Fox Wins Studio War For Robert Rodriguez' … 
Weinstein Co Gets "New Lease On Life"? 
Nicole Kidman Hires Angelina's Manager 
So What Are The Hot Films At Sundance? 
Huge $70M Settlement In TV Writers Age … 
TOLDJA! Momoa Chosen 'Conan' Barbarian 
Oscar Campaign Badmouthing Has Begun! 
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.
Hollywood Manipulated The New Yorker
Comments (100)
Post a Comment
Comments On Deadline Hollywood are monitored. So don't go off topic, don't impersonate anyone, don't get your facts wrong, and don't bore me.
Marketplace
News/Opinion Poll
Loading ...Box Office Poll
Loading ...
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.
A good article Nikki, but it could have used more swearing. Decaf.
We’re in a time between silents and sound for writers. Suddenly everyone wants video, avatars, representations of WHO the journalist is. The writer is a voice. There is an unmasking of writer’s voices going on at the moment that is ripping the profession apart. Blogging was invented to pay writers less. Journalism is expensive, blogging is cheap. What you’ve done, Nikki, is called your own shot. This content is worth something because it still has that aura of authenticity, not some patina of in-your-facebook nonsense. Even after $10 million + infusion, you are still genuine — good, bad or indifferent — and this is after careful observation.
The New Yorker tried to peg you, but missed what’s going on in the larger universe of writing and how reckless content is threatening the profession of writing for a living.
Nobody yet has totally melted down at having to use the frikkin’ word Tweet (and Twitter) like it is actually a legitimate word instead of a very sophisticated viral product placement device. If you are in the writing profession, you experience these literary erosions as a threat to the freedom of thought.
Those ARE legitimate words now — they’ve entered the popular lexicon. You don’t get to decide which words are “proper”. That’s not your place.
The expansion of language is hardly a deathblow to writing. If anything, it revitalizes the stodgy nature of purpleprosed self-indulgent “art” written by those who wouldn’t know a fantastic story if it slapped them in the face.
We can question which words get used and why, how information is delivered, whether certain terms have entered the lexicon or not. ‘Texting’ is generic, 140 character ‘microblogging’ is generic. ‘Tweet’ reflects a parent company, Twitter with 20 million users — which is not making any money apparently — and may soon get mired in patent infringement with TechRadium. The internet is a tricky place where terms like ‘astro-turfing’ simulate grassroots movements. The point is not so much who recognizes a great story as who/what is influencing the changes in how we receive information and whether these channels can be co-opted if we become so blindly accepting of these pathways.
In sum, beware of artificial tweetners,
Perfectly salient points, and I’m going to +1 you for your closing line alone. : p
Re the potential purchase of NBC by COMCAST…Isn’t it interesting
that they have the money to buy a TV network, but have to lay off
over 30 people to do it?
really bad timing!
SIGNED: Really appalling!!
http://www.observer.com/2009/media/amelia-lester-26-year-old-former-fact-checker-new-managing-editor-new-yorker
who can take them seriously after this?
Right… as if Hollywood never hired a hip young director who wasn’t ready for the scope of the job that awaited him/her. Hypocritical douche.
Though I don’t share many of the comments on the demise of the New Yorker, I did note in the article the comment that 50% of Variety income derived from the “for your consideration” ads. Now we know for sure the truth behind the flack-driven inflation to 10 Academy nominated films. There should be an investigation into any kickbacks or promises made to those who pushed this through without any discussion among the members. Remember all: no effort was made to solicit opinions, or to vote, on a change in traditon 70 years old.Why? Read between the lines. Hell, read the lines.
Credit to Jaime Hernandez, one of the great underground cartoonists, for the illo of Nikki up there. Too bad the NYer article isn’t nearly as good as the drawing.
And man if you are hearing about Nikki for the first time in a NYer article — talk about being out of the loop!
Wow, Sharon Waxman got her ass handed to her in that article… among the LOLs:
“Waxman covered Hollywood for the Times from 2003 to 2007; though her reporting occasioned a number of corrections, she is aggressively self-confident.”
After one dispute about whether Relativity Media had intended to pursue M-G-M, or perhaps force it into bankruptcy (Waxman said yes; Finke no), Finke told me triumphantly, “Did Relativity buy M-G-M? No, they did not—hello!”
“In mid-March, six weeks before the agencies finalized the deal, Sharon Waxman wrote, “William Morris is merging with Endeavor? I don’t think so.””
Keep up the good work Nikki!
Nikki. FYI. When Ari yells at you like that, it’s his way of putting up a smoke screen and making you feel like you’re winning. It’s complete manipulation.
I would hazard a guess that the people disparaging The New Yorker either don’t ever read it or skim through the cartoons. And to the moron who compared it to Entertainment Weekly: let’s just say if you’re a huge fan of EW, you’re probably not The New Yorker’s target audience. God forbid a magazine actually allow writers to write.
Some where Cary Grant is laughing his ass off and saying I hope they remake His girl Friday with Nikki Finke.
I’m still smiling after this quote:
“whom I enjoyed bitchslapping throughout”
Do you skate Nikki, caz the way you whip out the words makes everybody fall down in hysteria.
Kick it, bass beat track, enter THE Nikki Finke.
Come on, Nikke… “I’m not powerful, and I’m not influential.” Including that quote in The New Yorker piece would have ultimately amounted to a full-tilt portrait of delusional egomania. You make known how highly you value the sway and respect you’ve earned as much by actual reporting as the facade of a carefully constructed reputation as a “cunt.”
No doubt about it, Nikke; you’re a living legend who has earned her place in Hollywood history books as a fearsome icon of media moxie. You know this better than anyone. You planned it, achieved it, and still you play pretend with humble pie. Drop the baby shit, already. You have your cake (you eat it, too) but insist that the thought of taking even a single bite has never crossed your mind.
The reason Tad kept jewel quotes like your fave listed above (which you…apparently took down yourself during the interview process? Way to keep fact-checking alive and kicking) from outlining his Finke piece is simply one of respect for you, his subject, for whom he’s done a monstrous favor by including nary a whiff of hero-worship in what was surely a daunting challenge to undertake, extrapolating some semblance of a real person from a the sea of discordant paper trail heresay RE: Who is Nikke Finke?
For all the infinite layers of media savvy deflection tactics and painstaking attempts to balance self-preservation and professional bloodsport, give the guy his due, Nikke. He’s done the same for you.
Gabe, living legend ? Nobody in the real world has ever heard of Nikki Finke. Perhaps you should look up the word legend in the dictionary since you clearly don’t know what it means.
How’s that New Yorker subscription, Gabe? Keeping you enlightened I hope.
Ten million dollars? did i read that right? whoah.
Good on you Nikki,
Thank you. You have more balls than anyone, Nikki. Thank you thank you.
The deal today is if there’s a profile of someone the public is interested in, it’s going to be a hack job. That’s what happened to me last spring when I got profiled in New York Magazine promoting my latest book…(The writer: “I am in awe to even be in your presence.” I fell for it. Gave him DAYS of my time.) He had an agenda and he stuck to it. Paint me as an aging sourpuss. Interesting. Too bad it has nothing to do with me. Sadly, all my friends who took the time to be interviewed were misquoted. Even more annoying was a group of photo of me and my pals back in the 80’s. My wife is in the picture and she isn’t even named!
Two days ago I was asked to be interviewed for a profile on a couple of friends here in the city. I love them dearly. But I’m afraid to talk to the press (NYTimes), because they distort and take quotes out of context and I’m the one stuck with the stink.
The press is blood sport. That’s all. Not a source of information.
I don’t have your guts, so I’ll leave this with a “nom de plume”.
peace
I found Dean Baquet’s comment about Nikki Finke being a “power broker disguised as a journalist” horribly hypocritical.
This was the editor at the L.A. Times who allowed Chuck Philips – who admitted that Anthony Pellicano was his longtime news source – to cover the Pellicano case after he was arrested.
Philips’ stories attacked the FBI, the U.S. Attorney, Ron Meyer, victims, and others Pellicano saw as opposition. Nice payback to Pellicano for helping the paper all those years, dontcha think?
Under Baquet’s watch, the newspaper also HID the fact that it had reporter Philips call Pellicano about the threats on my life right after I was threatened. The paper hid it from readers, their own reporters, and the very law enforcement officers investigating their news source, Pellicano.
Nikki Finke called about Philips’ reporting on Meyer at a time that all of this reprehensible journalistic behavior was going on.
So for Baquet to say that Nikki was “a power broker disguised as a journalist” is a joke when the newspaper, under his watch, was a power broker for Pellicano disguised as journalism.
Information is ‘power’.
You have the most lucid power.
Quantum Mechanics probability theory may factor into the reporting and observation of Industry events as they are occurring. The actuality of such observation causes disturbances as to the relative positions of any party being reported and as such such astute observation has a determinate effect in the entertainment environment evolution.
Naturally all this is probable.
Cool.
Now the REALLY hard work begins.
Keeping it real …
and avoiding the flotsam and jetsam of the of an industry that thrives on flooding the pipeline. Because you are now the new pipeline. (So remain reclusive, and remain organic.)
And you’ll be O.K. … but just stay level …
And stay healthy – we need you here.
Really despise hypocrites, so good for you! And I really hate the “c” word. Have to say.
THERE’S the Nikki we know and love! You go girl, let ‘em have it!
Hilarious! But also not so amusing when you consider that this tepid, harmless, hypernegotiated eunuch reporting is now the norm in institutional journalism. These big companies simply are not realizing that if they don’t start earning their bread with real, hard content they will not have a future.
Oh come on, Nikki. This is the Internet. We must know! — did the illustration at least get your *cat* right?!!?
Nikki
A few weeks ago, my 84 year old mom called me and asked if I had heard of “Nikki Finke.” I said, Glo (mom’s name), I read Nikki all the time. How did you hear about her?” My mom said that she read about you in the NY Times and that you were “shaking up the town a bit.” She thought you sounded great and said I should definitely tell you so.
So, this is it. My mom is a fan. And she has excellent taste. And I agree with her. You have wide support in all sorts of places!
“I would hazard a guess that the people disparaging The New Yorker either don’t ever read it or skim through the cartoons. And to the moron who compared it to Entertainment Weekly: let’s just say if you’re a huge fan of EW, you’re probably not The New Yorker’s target audience. God forbid a magazine actually allow writers to write.”
Amen.
Disparage the profile of you if you want, I don’t really have an issue with that. But disparaging a magazine that you admittedly don’t even read is pretty empty.
New Yorker is still the best-written magazine out there – I know that the quality and depth of the writing is sometimes an afterthought to many in the way they get their info these days, but it still matters.
I actually think Tad wrote a very solid, dryly witty profile, which is no mean feat considering all the Tinseltown nightmares he had to deal with — including the subject. Oh my goodness, Tricky Nikki, I’ve seen overcooked dim sum with thicker skin than you!
You’re still awesome – neurotic and fearless all at once. But there’s no dispersing the deep, clinching pathos of cat pee scent and protestations of happiness.
Best zinger of the day. Amen.
Nikki,
So funny to see this just after Tad Friend profiled Elon Musk. Much of Musk’s staff had the same reaction: Friend turned him into a caricature yet completely the missed the real story and real dirt. I know Elon was laughing about the article with a (cough) good friend at dinner just after it came out. The writer parachutes in to California, does some superficial reporting, gets played — he’s desperate to be seen as smart — and then moves on to his next bj. The New Yorker could definitely use someone on the ground out here. I know in SV the magazine is regularly laughed at. I guess the same is true (now, at least) in Hollywood.
Vi
Nikki, Nikki, Nikki -
The New Yorker is Hollywood’s buttboy? Hey – you can’t take that status away from the LOS ANGELES TIMES! They’ve been buttboy, towel lady, concubine, and ass-kisser supreme to Hollywood since long ago.
They never met a scandal they didn’t RUN away from – until it was outed in the New York Times & Wall Street Journal first. Remember how they bent over for David Begelman? He had his member inserted waaay up the Times – right up to the Publisher.
Nikki, I love you! Please, please more on what’s happening at the LA Times – it’s some of most fun stuff you ever write!
Who the hell is Nikki Finke?
Miss Nikki,
You have a great moment to expand and fully describe what your allegations entail. No one in recent memory has stepped to The New Yorker. Go further–take this bitch to the fucking bank. Go on and destroy all the misrepresentations you can. No one has the “power” you have to attack this institution–the mag’s Hollywood coverage is its weakest link. I demand a takedown. Multi-thousand words. People on the East Coast, especially those of us in NYC, care way more about the editorial process at Conde’s Big Baby than H-wood gosips. Take you moment and run girl. Run, run! Tell us more.
Thanks,
A Conde writer looking for answers
I really read the New Yorker article. And even when I got a little tired in the middle, it was quit a good reading. Getting to know, how – at least a bit – some and which news materialize on your website.
And even if you could kick out all the creepy stuff, making them your buttbitch, I have to concede there was enough left for me. Thanks for talking to the NY. Yours the best website for Hollywood news. More then ever.
Yeah, but will you read my fucking screenplay?
And yes, Larry Brooks is absolutely right about the Begelman coverage. Reading it, I was so pissed off at the ass-kissing that I quit reading the LAT for months, getting my news and chat from wherever I could. Reading any rag then available. Even the Press-Telegram (not too bad a paper then). Even though I still work for the LAT, sometimes I cannot stand the Hollywood kiss-ass stuff, I still love some of the feature writers. Sure, bitchslap Remnick all you wish. The NY still publishes very good stuff, although Hollywood is not its main interest. We are so self-centered out here. Good on your coverage, though; I’m not a regular reader, but like your in-your-face tone. Please keep it up.
Second post.
I understand the back slap by Nikki. I read the New Yorker article, at least half, until I wanted to puke. The rest I printed and used for, well you don’t want to know, kitty litter.
Another hatchet job. Who writes about another person’s car accidents as if Nikki was a movie star?
Who reveals Nikki’s health condition when stars are allowed to walk around stoned until their deaths.
Who releases personal health information and described Nikki as only liking Legally Blonde ( Selma and that Oscar winner were great).
The New Yorker “ journalist” was totally off base in using that. It was ignoble to use Nikki’s health to glower readers with what pity, envy, and hatred. I hate to say this but everyone should piss on this so called journalist and cancel their New Yorker subscription.
Given a choice between being a cunt and being irrelevant (as is the New Yorker, I’d take the former any day. Good on you!
I think the best thing about the New Yorker profile was the illustration of you and Blue, your cat.
Carr of the right coast Times chimes in:
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/05/darling-nikki-new-yorker-profile-sparks-profane-response/
Ms. Finke, “Rocks!”
I thought The New Yorker article was sexist (comparing Nikki to early gossip columnists who covered the stars’tawdry personal lives, etc, etc, etc) and missed the point entirely, so I posted the following (overlong) comment on Gawker’s post about it, though it occurs to me that Nikki is not exactly a person who needs defending:
Enjoyed your post, Kamer. Will add that I thought Friend’s comparison to Nikki with early female Hollywood gossip columnists was a sexist double standard that overshadowed the article. I think the article and Nikki’s reputation would be very different if she were a man, especially in a town and industry where films are written, greenlighted, funded, produced and directed almost entirely by men. She not only understood the zeitgeist of internet news in LA, she became it.
I’d also add that while the New Yorker article shows her tenacity and cajones, especially in a company town that’s all about relationships, what he glossed over, and where she was effing brilliant, was during the WGA strike, where she was the lone journalist calling out mega-corporate studios for their bs and serving – really serving – as ground zero for not only the latest information, but a place where all sides could air their information/opinions/grievances, both in her posts and in her comments sections (which were extensive, and because of the heated nature of the debate, she had to constantly monitor).
She worked her arse off during those months (to the detriment of her health), when other Hollywood bloggers and most trade journalists wouldn’t go near the biggest issue in Hollywood. Of course they were largely dependent on the studios for advertising, especially during the run-up to the Oscars, when the strike took place. So here’s this huge event that rocked Hollywood and the film industry – and Nikki Finke covered it pretty much single-handedly and round the clock as the press looked on. (Anne Thompson at least gave it a brief mention in her column: “I know Nikki Finke is kicking ass with the writers strike.” !!!)
It shows how powerful these corporations and their advertising dollars are, to silence the fourth estate like that, and one could say it shows how powerful Nikki is, but it would miss the point. She had not only the courage, but the humanity and decency to insist on reporting both sides, standing up to corporate mega-powers and giving the writers a seat at town hall. So while she can be annoying (mainly when I don’t agree with her), she has earned the respect of many.
It would have been interesting to see how she might have handled Joseph McCarthy and the Hollywood Blacklist of the 50’s. I’d bet just about anything that McCarthy would have gotten the hell out of Dodge with his tail between his legs. If he’d shown up at all.
You’re right. That is overlong. (And overlame).
Whatever they paid you for the site, it wasn’t enough.
You are a woman after my own heart, Nikki …
and it’s a wise heart. Keep tellin’ it like it is…
Nikki:
Your perseverance through the often unappreciative news business to a successful venue of your own creation is nothing short of inspiring. I was at the Dallas Morning News when you covered Princess Diana/Prince Charles wedding and afterward was vaguely aware of your endeavors in print journalism. But since you’ve gone digital I read about your exploits all of the time. I marvel at your strength and enthusiasm for the written word, saying whatever the hell you want as you nail your targets with the facts. We never exchanged a word at the DMN, as I was rather in awe of you and still am, as apparently are a lot of powerful people who evidently need the knee in the nuts that you so willingly give. I’m enthralled how you disembowel your critics with their own words. Your never-give-up attitude of the past inspired me then and you continue to do so with your unbending chutzpah.
P.S. My husband and your former state editor at DMN, Wayne Epperson, also sends his “give em hell” regards.
Keep up the good work!!!
Don’t know what to make of the New Yorker article, Nikki’s response, and Gawker’s response to Nikki’s response! Wow.
Hollywood is a very strange place.
It seems everyone likes to piss on those who become successful.
I think I love you, Nikke. Almost as much as I hate the reactionary, celebrity-ass-kissing New Yorker. The cartoons are NOT funny, The talk of the town is irrelevant, and with the exception of Sy Hersh the reporting is subnormal (and even he administers blow jobs to source generals) and Tad Friend is the WORSE reporter in the country. Why the fuck did someone hire him? He can’t tell a fact from a press release.
jaime hernandez did a cartoon of you & you’re bitching?
who cares about the article, nobody reads that crap.
it’s all about the cartoon.
jaime-freaking-hernandez!!!
for chrissake, get over it.
Harvey Weinstein IS a cunt. With a period.
It’s too bad that these priceless NF quotes about Tad Friend hit the street after his book was published. They’d make GREAT blurbs.
I like the New Yorker. If it went away, it would be a bad thing. Nikki’s flip dismissal is typical, of her. But I usually agree with her. Oh, well.
“She represents a clear look into the furnace of ego and insecurity, a business that is venal and occasionally pathological. Deadline Hollywood Daily reminds that the dream factory runs on nightmares.”
Yep.
The New Yorker article is actually rather complementary of you. Why not at least appreciate that? But it seems [I think] that you are beginning to think you have as much power as they say you do – otherwise you wouldn’t say you found Tad Friend ‘easy to manipulate’. Think about it. Why manipulate anyone? Isn’t that what loathsome Hollywood producers do?
If you were really indifferent you’d just shrug it off and provide a link.
That said, keep striking fear in the hearts of Hollywood. Someone has to do it and it won’t be Variety.
The New Yorker has gotten so much better under Remnick. George Packer is great. Anthony Lane is funny. Alex Ross is an excellent critic. They consistently publish better fiction than any other magazine. I don’t believe Nikki reads the New Yorker, and her response to the article was too angry to really hit its mark. Stick to trashing Friend’s article if you must, not the whole magazine. It doesn’t make money because the population is increasingly illiterate.
Jesus Christ – where’d that get that cartoon from, “Mary Worth?” And MUST there be a cat? Not only a cunt, but a CAT LADY too?
Ridiculous.
You’re taking pot-shots at a magazine with staff writers like John Lee Anderson and Seymour Hersh (remember him breaking the Abu Ghraib story in The New Yorker?) who are doing some of the best investigative journalism in any US publication just because you don’t like what The New Yorker has to say?
What’s painfully obvious from all of your postings Nikki is that if you’re not in control, you don’t like it.
I didn’t think the NY profile was bad. It’s a thumbnail sketch and only 9 pages. Nikki came off well and I’m glad she got the props. Nikki, is your cat a Russian Blue? If so, I have one too and they can be cunts over food….never satisfied if they’re pissy.
I think the ‘New Yorker’ piece was less about Nikki than it was about the way our coastal ‘town’ works and I am one of the citizens, so it all rang true to me. Who looked bad in this article? Bloviated producers leaking screeds that would get a middle manager fired? Check!…Wonk-eyed fat pants with grubby nail-bitten hands having hissy fits over Oscar competition? Check. Condescending ’sources’ who go on the record with: “It was clear to the receptionists [!] what was going to happen to Jim [Wiatt],” as if receptionists are the Mop n’ Glo caste that really wants to see and hear execs’ implosions all around their desks like so many zapped chigger bugs? You can smell a boss in crisis/career irrelevance at a hundred paces. Check!
So, the article was a realistic look at the Hollywood playpen and if Nikki is the referee and takes away some rattles and serves up some time-outs, more power to her! Many of the higher-paid leaders around here could use a bit more class, honesty and discretion. This is Hollywood, not NASA. Nikki never fed me to the lions and I never have worried about it ever happening because, well, I’m not a backstabbing, expense account freak of ego and backstabbing. It’s easy to do: leave Hollywood at the office whenever feasible, have a real life at home with real people and read your news from sources you trust, including Nikki’s site. Easy and done! Congrats Nikki, it was a fine profile.
Tad Friend got most things right. The details of those situations… whatever… the blogger is so busy digging for little pieces of shit… she doesn’t even know. But the main thing I got from the piece is that the big boys manipulate the Blogger when it comes down to it. The real story about the WME merger… an agency disappeared. “The town” shrank. The pie gets smaller for everybody. The world got tougher for the talent. Business diminishes and Show diminishes more. All those little scoops about the execs mean so little. The blogger misses the fact that the Mass Media ship is sinking slowly in troubled waters. Hollywood is fading. It won’t die. There will be mini resurgences but the glory days are gone gone gone. And the blogger is all worried about what the captain of the ship is having for dinner. And her readers… butt fucked and untalented who showed up in town for the money… which is really tough to get these days. So read on, everybody. It’s a nice distraction from the sad realities of so much of show business these days. The trades may not “get it” anymore… but once they contained the dreams. Positives about creative energy amidst the day to day BS of the business. The blogger presides over this little hell of petty reckonings… poisoning the possibility of art, beauty, great drama, fantastic entertainment, etc. etc. Get thee to the Wall Street Journal and go fuck yourself.
How did someone so pathetic and neurotic become so powerful? Life never ceases to amaze me.
Re; The conde nast dildo. Help!
What distinguishes your column for me, way beyond the consistent courage, appealing literary style and refreshing absence of sentimentality, is that it serves up hard practical usable reliable and professional journalism.
so it is no surprise to learn the most salient newsworthy fact once again through your efforts. the news that various flacks helped influence and edit a New Yorker article allows us to once more reexamine not just the veracity but how easily and frequently to manipulation and distortion of much of the of mainstream media’s so called “objectivity” & “professional standards”.i sold out.
that Remick and Friendly and ultimately and probably with the most blood of capitulation on its hands conde nast owners are so easily swayed to so cravenly compromise their independence re accuracy and suggests that unlike Hollywood Deadline they are as much a part of the hollywood establishment as to be rendered toothless paper tiger hacks, utterly unreliable for Industry news coverage and uncompromised opinion, that in one of Private Eye, the london bimonthly, best expressions the new yorker staff are simply shameful(or is it shameless)”log rollers”.
Vanity fair, the new yorker, the entire conde nast company is really a quasi pr company; its journalism and coverage utterly whored out to serve the interests of its very subject matter, masquerading as objective journalism but so dependent & beholden to its sources and advertisers, its really a matter more of who’s “special’ interests prevail on any given day, the reading public be damned. i thank ms finke for reminding us of this ugly example of the new yorker prostituting itself one more time to, for example, brad grey ”footsoldiers” and doubtless all the “majors”, one way or another.
i need to be reminded of mencken’s famous quote every day, not be an unconscious reader/john derided by conde nast editors as a mush brained consumer/trick who will read and beliieve anything.
I am joining the Cult of Nikki Finke. Your writing is free to do with me as it sees fit. I am it’s gimp and await my next bitch slapping.
Just another day in the cannibal village – setting aside the demise of The Algonquin Round Table, did your traffic increase any after the little people got wind of DH?
This is why I love you, Nikkster. Keep kicking ass and naming names. Honesty in H-wood is as rare as net profits. As the trades and the Timeses (NY & LA) fade slowly into oblivion, SOMEBODY has to at least try to shine a light on the gabardine schmekels. You get my vote.