10 wild lines from that Elizabeth Holmes interview
Voice changes and trips to the zoo
the true crime that's worth your time
We have moved to the “appeal to the court of public opinion” phase of the Elizabeth Holmes drama. Holmes, was sentenced last fall to 11 years in federal prison for her role in an investor fraud scheme at Theranos, the company she cofounded; she remains free as appeals to her conviction wind their way through the court.
But you know all that already, and by the time you read this you likely know a slew of new things about Holmes, who hasn’t made much of a public statement since her company was revealed to be fraudulent, and her legal troubles began. That changed on Monday, when the New York Times chose to top its much-maligned piece on alleged crypto con artist Sam Bankman-Fried with a strange profile of Holmes by political journalist Amy Chozick, which clocks in at over 5000 words.
It’s a piece that’s been hate-aggregated by, well, everyone, so I feel a little lazy about piling on, but it’s just so weird. Let’s start with the reactions:
Cute! New York Times Helps Elizabeth Holmes Launder Her Reputation Before Prison [Jezebel]
I Cannot Get Over the Name of Elizabeth Holmes’ Dog That She Claimed Was a Wolf [Salon]
Elizabeth Holmes Has Changed Her Voice Again [NY Mag/The Cut]
Elizabeth Holmes Claims Amanda Seyfried Was “Playing a Character I Created” in ‘The Dropout’ [The Hollywood Reporter]
Chozick is getting raked over the coals for this one, but I don’t know that she had a lot of options, here. This is what happened during the conversations, this is what was said, and here’s a side dish of what Chozick is thinking. It seems like many folks are angry that there wasn’t more Chozick in this piece, but, y’all, we clicked on the link for Holmes, and that’s what Chozick served.
There is probably a conversation to be had about if the NYT should have played ball with this “interview opportunity” (as it was likely presented to them) in the first place. But if they hadn’t bitten, someone else would — and it’s that someone else that would have gotten the clicks and aggregation and attention today. Imagine being in that meeting at 620 Eighth Ave., where some higher-up asks why the San Francisco Chronicle (or whatever) got the Holmes profile instead of the NYT. And some editor, all sweaty pits and j-school idealism, says “we could have had it, but we passed.” My stomach gets a pit just thinking about it.
So we have this 5K+ word Holmes interview, inevitable as Thanos (not to be confused with, well, you know) but less married to the truth. Maybe the ethical thing is to turn away from it. But that wouldn’t be much fun. Here are 10 lines from the profile that struck me as the most bananas, but know I could easily have pulled 20, 30, or 100. It’s just that bizarre a piece.
Day 43*: the morning we went for breakfast and Ms. Holmes breastfed her baby, Invicta (Latin for “invincible”) and sang along to Ace of Base’s “All That She Wants” on the loudspeakers (“This is the first album I ever owned.”).
If you hate Elizabeth Holmes, you probably think her feigned perma-hoarseness was part of an elaborate scheme to defraud investors. If you are a person who is sympathetic to Ms. Holmes, then the James Earl Jones inflection was a sign of the impossible gymnastics that female founders must perform to be taken seriously. If you spend time with Ms. Holmes, as I did, then you might come away like me, and think that, as with many things about Elizabeth Holmes, it was both. Either way, even Mr. Evans agrees, the voice was real weird.
I was admittedly swept up in Liz as an authentic and sympathetic person. She’s gentle and charismatic, in a quiet way. My editor laughed at me when I shared these impressions, telling me (and I quote), “Amy Chozick, you got rolled!” I vigorously disagreed! You don’t know her like I do!
“[Sunny Balwani] always told me I needed to ‘kill Elizabeth,’ so I could become a good entrepreneur.”
Ms. Holmes’s story of how she got here — to the bright, cozy house and the supportive partner and the two babies — feels a lot like the story of someone who had finally broken out of a cult and been deprogrammed. After her relationship with Mr. Balwani ended and Theranos dissolved, Ms. Holmes said, “I began my life again.” But then I remember that Ms. Holmes was running the cult.
Ms. Holmes and Mr. Evans went to the desert oasis for moneyed bohemians. She burned a tribute to Theranos. “There was an incredible sense of grief because I’d given everything to it, my whole life, since I’d been 18,” she said of that period.
In 2019, after U.S. District Judge Edward J. Davila set a date for Ms. Holmes’s criminal trial, she and Mr. Evans hit the road. As prosecutors assembled their case, Ms. Holmes and Mr. Evans spent six months traveling the country in an R.V., sleeping in campgrounds and Walmart parking lots. Ms. Holmes balanced outdoor yoga and long hikes in national parks with working on her legal defense.
Mr. Evans took a few calls for work while I was visiting. I asked what he does. “A lot of different stuff, investing, starting companies,” he replied, without elaborating. How is Ms. Holmes paying her legal expenses? “I can’t,” she said. “I have to work for the rest of my life to try to pay for it.” I asked if Mr. Evans’s family was helping to cover her legal expenses. She shook her head no.
Ms. Holmes said she believed that making herself the poster girl for women in tech put a huge target on her back. She regrets being the subject of fawning magazine covers (though I imagine the authors of those stories regret it more). “I never lost sight of the mission but I think I did of the narrative,” she said. “The story became this story that was totally snowballed away from what we were actually talking about.”
“I’m still thinking about the journalists being intimidated,” Ms. Holmes said after we’d moved on to several other topics. “As I said at trial, I completely wish we’d handled that situation differently.” She tears up. “I take responsibility for it because I was C.E.O. of the company and at the end of the day, that’s that, but I don’t believe in people being treated that way, period.” (In response to Ms. Holmes seemingly casting blame on her legal team, a spokeswoman for Mr. Boies texted, “Whatever.”)
*Number refers to the countdown to the day Holmes was supposed to report to prison, but didn’t due to a pending appeal.
Pulling those lines means I read that thing twice, and, folks, I don’t know. I don’t think the piece (or Chozick) is hustling to humanize Holmes, but I also don’t think it pushes as hard as it could have — and on top of that, I think Chozick (and her quoted-above editor) knows that and feels a little squicky about it. I am not mad that I read it, nor am I mad at Holmes for doing the interview, but there’s an overall lack of rigor in the profile that isn’t befitting of the Times (am I giving the NYT too much credit here? Perhaps!).
This is unfair to Chozick, and I feel bad for even bringing it up, but do you remember Taffy Brodesser-Akner’s fairly iconic profile of Gwyneth Paltrow/GOOP? If you don’t, go read it now, as it’s one of the all-time greatest profiles of someone the reporter thinks is bullshit ever written. It is hard, while reading today’s Holmes piece, not to wish that Brodesser-Akner had taken this assignment and run with it. I suspect she would have been less easily seduced. — EB
Just a one-hitter today thanks to Life Stuff (tm), but coming up on Best Evidence: “Cozy” true crime via PBS, and the youngest lamster is finally caught.
What is this thing? This should help. Follow Best Evidence @bestevidencefyi on Instagram, email us at editorial at bestevidence dot fyi, or call or text us any time at 919-75-CRIME.