I remember once upon a time meeting a young woman who had come, unbidden by the hostess, to “write up” a social function where a number of celebrated people were congregated.

Her employer had sent her to the house, telling her to obtain an entree by fair means or foul; and as she was well dressed and quiet in manner, she was not repulsed by an amiable hostess.  This lady realized that the reporter has his or her living to make, and must be either helped or hindered by the willingness or unwillingness of people to furnish material for copy.  Being informed that the young woman was “literary,” and chancing to stand near her for a few moments, I asked her the nature of her work.

The young woman looked a trifle embarrassed, as she answered:  “Well, to tell you the truth, I write a good many disagreeable and nasty things about people, especially people in public life.  The editors who take my work will have that kind.  I have essayed better things, and they would not touch them.  So I am compelled to write the stuff they do want.  I must make a living.”  When I read the “stuff” in question, I was inclined to doubt the assertion of the writer that “she must make a living.”  The world would be the better should she and all her kind cease to exist.  Ridicule, falsehood, and insinuation were the leading traits of the young woman’s literary style.  Costumes and personalities were caricatured, and conversations and actions misstated.  The entire article would have been libelous, had it not been too cowardly to deserve so bold a word.

It is useless for any man or woman to assert that such reportorial work is done from necessity.  The blackmailer and the pickpocket have as much right to the plea, as the newspaper masked-assassin, with the concealed weapon of a pen.

If you are ever asked by any editor to do this reportorial stiletto work, let me urge you to take to professional burglary, rather than consent to write what such an employer demands.

It is far less despicable to rob houses of things of mercantile value, than to rob characters and reputations and personalities.  Again, when you are sent out upon a commission to obtain an interview with any person, obtain what you seek and take nothing else away with you.

Just as you would scorn to pawn the watch of the famous actress which you may find lying on the table as you pass out, so scorn to sell any personal speech she may have carelessly dropped in your hearing which you know was not intended for publication.  Petty larceny is not a noble feature of interviewing.  Even though a facility for selling such dishonestly gained property to advantage be yours, do not convince yourself or be convinced that larceny should be included in your reportorial duties.

I recollect speaking with you once upon the difficulties young women encountered who attempted to win honours in a dramatic career.  You felt that the necessity to cater to the ideas and wishes of inferior minds, in representing a character on the stage, would be one of the hardest phases of stage life to meet.