Thanks, Tina

One of my favorite books of the past couple of years is Tina Brown’s Vanity Fair Diaries. This is partly because I was hooked on Vanity Fair magazine in the late 80s, following the antics of those Reagan-era party people who have since faded from view. The Kelly Kleins and Paloma Picassos and Gayfryd Steinbergs, the Oscar de la Rentas and Warren Beattys and Jon Peters.

And it’s also because there are few people in writing and editing who I admire as much as I admire Tina. For a long time, I was an engaged magazine reader, and I was aware, even at the time, that she was doing something special at Vanity Fair. The magazine then was a high-gloss carnival of crime, celebrity and politics that always found the most interesting angle. And there was never any doubt that Tina was responsible for it.

This was further borne out when she moved over to the editor’s chair at The New Yorker, and promptly introduced photos, and pepped up the newsstand by adding a half-sheet of removable sell lines to the magazine’s venerable illustrated covers. These upgrades, though sacrilegious to TNY purists, were a sure sign to me of Tina’s genius. They maintained the quality and the legend of the magazine while making it that much more commercial. Her ideas have almost always made money and extended the lives of the properties she’s stewarded or built.

I really loved 80s Tina, in all her power-suited, Lacroix-gilded glory, and now she has a podcast, TBD with Tina Brown, and I’m a subscriber, of course. The format is a single interview per show with one person – Chris Christie, Kara Swisher, David Brooks, David Remnick. Politicians, journalists, artists. It’s similar in a way to another podcast I listen to avidly, Fresh Air. I enjoy Terry Gross’ interviews, I subscribe and listen to the show a couple times a week, but there’s a difference between Fresh Air and TBD. It took me a few listens to figure out what it was.

Tina Brown has a point of view, and she’s not afraid to share it. Her interviews come from a specific place that is not necessarily neutral, and it makes them juicier, deeper, and more honest than much of what passes for (let’s call it) journalism these days. I didn’t realize how starved I was for intelligent subjectivity. We’re in an era now when the jones for “balanced” journalism is at its peak, but I think what we end up getting is blander and ultimately less truthful and more dangerous.

A podcast is a great place for someone like Tina to explore – podcast hosts may be playing to the already converted (also known as an echo chamber) but I love having fresh access to her unique take on the world, and her specific point of view.