We Want Media

Sam Sifton, culture editor at the New York Times, says that becoming an effective critic takes experience and the backing of a reputable institution.

Brooklyn native Sifton, 40, knows that like a fine wine, critics get better with age and experience. For aspiring young journalists, writing a good review can be a challenge. Many pitfalls await the naive and inexperienced. As Sifton told our journalism class, “You’ve got to be careful of weighing actual expertise with perceived expertise.”

Though the years, Sifton has held down many positions, learned many lessons, and written many reviews. He’s been through the ropes and learned his stuff though trial and tribulation. As the current culture editor, Sifton strives to bring the best critiques in the business to the people.

His journalism career began when he submitted a toned down version of his Harvard senior thesis to the New Republic as a review. From there, he moved on to American Heritage, which he says would most likely be found “in your grandparent’s living room.” His metaphorical critic’s tone is evidently deep seeded; something he believes is a carefully acquired skill.

After four years of teaching social studies in the Bushwick public school system, Sifton headed to the New York Press. It was a move his mother, acclaimed book publisher Elizabeth Sifton, still hassles him about today. There, Sifton fought to crush the “dirty hippies at the Village Voice,” he says. However, the Press only succeeded in forcing the Voice into free distribution, giving the Voice an leg up competition wise. Soon after, Sifton was courted by the New York Times. However, his punk rock inklings were still strong at the time, and he resisted with cries of “Damn the man!”

Instead, Sifton headed to Talk magazine. He describes his time there as a “beautiful disaster.” “I went from gutter punk to Mr. Fancy Pants glossy magazine,” he says. However, the publication went bankrupt after draining $50 million and Sifton says he had to “learn from watching people weep.” (He's got a knack for brutal honesty). At this point, he knew he had to make a change and accept the offer from the Times.

Despite his hesitations, Sifton says the Times has changed into “the nexus of gutter punk and glossy.” Sifton applies labeling theory, which states that something ultimately becomes what people call it, to what makes a good critic. The market labels critics as effective or not, because ultimately, if people choose to listen to a critic, the dollars speak for themselves.

A review by a writer from the Times has the power to influence millions of people because the paper has such a large following, he says. Sifton describes the paper as a “totem,” referencing Emile Durkheim’s study of the power of social symbols. Crudely put, Durkheim demonstrated that when people place value on certain symbols, those symbols then carry seriously powerful weight and significance to the rest of society. As Sifton puts it, the Times is a “totem of class.”

Experience, journalistic integrity, and market-proven authority distinguish an effective and powerful critic, he says. The Times, like a good critic, has developed its authority over time, unlike many amateurs (see: unemployed bloggers) or collective reviews. Sifton doesn’t think too highly of “citizen” or “collective journalism.”

[Sifton is not a big fan of Zagat]. “Ew, this resaraunt is only a 19, not a 22,” he says, feigning nose-in-the-air disgust and adopting a false uber-pretentious accent. Back to his casual tone, he attests that “democracy of criticism is not true.” Sifton’s learned, mostly the hard way, that aggregate opinions can easily be feigned and swayed. With an air of amused self mockery he says, “Ten people love my book on Amazon, but nine are close friends of my mom.”