When the Johann Hari controversy broke I was immediately reminded of a similar story from the 90s: Ruth Shalit.

Shalit was a young journalist to whom the word rockstar could easily be said to apply. By way of example, in 1994 at the age of just 24, GQ’s then editor Art Cooper gave her a $45,000 contract to write three articles* (this at a time when she was already earning an associate editor’s salary at The New Republic). But by 1996 things were fast unravelling. Accused, among other things, of inserting quotes from other journalists into her articles without attribution, Shalit was ultimately fired from The New Republic. She defending herself to the end, but ultimately her actions caught up with her.

And like Shalit, Johann Hari’s actions have finally caught up with him. Although in Hari’s case, unlike Shalit, the employer lacks the courage of their publication’s apparent convictions.  

However Johann might like to portray his actions (“intellectual accuracy” appears to be the term of choice), he has engaged in activity which brings his and his paper’s reputation into disrepute. What’s more, he’s brought journalism into disrepute.

Standards are import. Hari has made a living out of holding others to account. Now it’s time for him act in accordance with his own accountability in all of this. The evidence against him is plain to see, but it’s perhaps his Chavez interview that most effectively demonstrates the dishonesty in his actions. I defy anyone to look at the evidence and not reach the conclusion that Hari is guilty of serious misconduct.

Johann is a solid intellectual with real talent. He’s also a genuinely nice guy. But he’s crossed a line. The lesson of Shalit is all too clear. Hari should take the opportunity to do the right thing. And if he does, he’ll ultimately be able to return to journalism all the stronger.

*see the March 1996 issue of George

 

 

 

 

Tags: Johann Hari, Plagiarism, Ruth Shalit