I’m fond of well-done, innovative journalism. I like work that stretches the boundaries of traditional journalism, that breaks rules, that gets away from the inverted pyramid format.
So I want to highlight this WP article, which attempts to tell a story almost entirely through Facebook postings (with some annotation by the writer).
(Warning: this story does not have a happy ending.)
I’m not sure how I feel about the story, though. On the one hand, I think it is an interesting departure from traditional journalistic forms. On the other hand, I have a lot of sympathy for the people in the comments who wonder a) why one family’s struggle, sad though it may be, deserves that much play, and b) why reprinting Facebook postings is considered “journalism”. Especially since the article doesn’t reveal much about peripartum cardiomyopathy; what causes this problem, how common is it, are there screening tests?
It’s sad, but is it art? Especially compared to “Fatal Distraction“, the Gene Weingarten Pulitizer winner, which is equally sad, but also asks and tries to answer some important questions. (If you haven’t read “Fatal Distraction” and have missed my previous warnings: it is an extremely disturbing story, and you should think very carefully about whether you want to read it. Especially if you are a parent of small children.)
as part of their “Comics Panel” feature.