In The Newsroom, Dressing Truth Before Power

The Transom’s reporters have recently been scolded by a fashion reporter for looking “terrified and clearly out of place” at fashionable events. (And: “SO nerdy, and they dress/ act like it! They walk around with glasses and little notepads. Nobody is going to open up to people like that!”)

So it was with great interest that we saw that fashion powers-that-be have weighed in on two distinguished newswomen of the New York Times: prisoner of principle Judith Miller and prisoner of the Culture department, Arts & Leisure deputy editor Ariel Kaminer. They’re two of our very favorite power journo-machers… but do their fashions convey their schwang?

As for Ms. Miller’s big day in court this week, The Washington Post said:

She was also carrying a black shoulder bag whose most distinguishing feature was its ability to keep a multitude of writing tools within easy reach. […] She was wearing the sort of practical, comfortable and just-stylish-enough clothes that can be worn in any situation […] With her sensible pageboy and its trim bangs, she has the look of an English lecturer at Barnard. […] She wore reporter clothes — almost a suit, but not really.

Clearly, nobody is going to open up to people like that.

As for Ms. Kaminer: in a spread in the August, 2005, issue of Lucky magazine (p.158), she looks strangely, wondrously radiant for someone, in The Transom’s opinion, who has been forced to sit so very close to former culture boss Jon Landman for so long. Though she does not, surely, appear as radiant as other members of the Arts department, nor could she have that special glow spread by a television critic in the office. (Perhaps this is a good place for The Transom to disclose that it once lifted a small suitcase of money from Arts & Leisure in exchange for a small suitcase of words.)

What The Transom is saying is: the New York Times, though not a terribly womanly place, is in fact a very fertile place at the moment. It is perhaps a dangerous and wonderful time to have ovaries.

But back on topic: “[T]he Times,” Ms. Kaminer told Lucky, “is obviously a place where the emphasis is on working hard, not dressing up.” (She also notes that in her first job, her fashion look was more like “an attempt to convince people I’d slept in my clothes,” a sentiment the Transom can really get behind.)

And most importantly: “If you can’t compete,” Ms. Kaminer said to Lucky, “don’t: nothing’s more uncomfortable than looking like you’re trying too hard.” Clearly it’s damned if you do and damned if you don’t for The Transom. And so it is decided: The Transom shall err on the side of schlub.
—Choire Sicha

Article continues below
More from Politics
STAR OF DAVID OR 'PLAIN STAR'?   If you thought "CP Time" was impolitic, on July 2 Donald Trump posted a picture on Twitter of a Star of David on top of a pile of cash next to Hillary Clinton's face. You'd think after the aforementioned crime stats incident (or after engaging a user called "@WhiteGenocideTM," or blasting out a quote from Benito Mussolini, or...) Trump would have learned to wait a full 15 seconds before hitting the "Tweet" button. But not only was the gaffe itself bad, the attempts at damage control made the BP oil spill response look a virtuoso performance.  About two hours after the image went up on Trump's account, somebody took it down and replaced it with a similar picture that swapped the hexagram with a circle (bearing the same legend "Most Corrupt Candidate Ever!"!). Believe it or not, it actually got worse from there. As reports arose that the first image had originated on a white supremacist message board, Trump insisted that the shape was a "sheriff's star," or "plain star," not a Star of David. And he continued to sulk about the coverage online and in public for days afterward, even when the media was clearly ready to move on. This refusal to just let some bad press go would haunt him later on.
Donald Trump More Or Less Says He’ll Keep On Tweeting as President