Killer Story

This originally appeared at The Irresponsible Reader along with a Q&A with the author (who had some great answers).

---

What’s Killer Story About?

While studying journalism in school, Petra acted as a counselor for a high school journalism camp. In that role, she met and befriended a young girl named Livvy Anderson. Over the years since then, the two forged a strong friendship—almost like sisters. At some point though, the relationship faltered—in college, Livvy started posting videos online spouting (in Petra’s view) extreme right-wing politics, hateful speech, and the like. For example, she defended a star football player accused of raping a woman on campus by trashing her reputation and exposing personal details. Rather than pushing back or even arguing with her friend, Petra chilled communication, assuming it was a phase, and focused on her own work.

And it might have been a phase if Livvy hadn’t been killed. The murder was fairly sensational—it happened while Livvy was recording a video (but she paused the recording so no one saw it or the murderer). The accused killer was acquitted—and most of the country (including Petra) assumed it was a travesty of justice and that he got away with it. The Court of Public Opinion definitely found him guilty.

Years later, Petra has found herself (like most young print journalists) bouncing around from newspaper to newspaper, trying to stay employed. She’s now at a major Boston newspaper and thinks that life is stable—the subjects of her stories might not be that glamorous, but she’s working, and the big story is around the corner.

Until she’s laid off. She panics at this point—her boyfriend (who moved cross-country with her for this job, changing the course of his career) isn’t going to put up with the lack of stability much longer, and it’s going to only get harder getting a job at the rate she’s going. So she throws out a mad pitch to her editor—what if she could definitively prove who killed Olivia Anderson? She tells him this story isn’t just the kind of thing for the paper—it’d make a great podcast.

Visions of the kind of revenue that Serial and similar podcasts could bring to the paper, not to mention the publicity of this kind of story, he gives her two weeks to firm up the story, start producing the podcast, and they’ll see what happens.

Petra heads off to find the evidence she pretended to have during that meeting—and hopefully much more.

The Journalism of this Novel

I’ve talked before about how I’m a sucker for a novel about a driven journalist—typically a print journalist, too. I’m always ready, willing, and able to embrace and fall into the romance of the crusading reporter. Or just one who does the job well, without a crusade.

But those kinds of stories are getting harder to tell and to believe in our current media landscape. Not just because print journalism is dying (for worse or for worser). It’s definitely not the track that Witten takes here. Petra is desperate and acts desperately—she lies to her editor at every turn, overstating her case and the evidence she has at each step of the way. Almost every fictional reporter* cuts a corner here and there and bends a rule and the truth in pursuit of the story and/or the truth. Petra amputates corners and forces the truth about her actions into positions only the most experienced yogi can handle—at least when it comes to what she tells her editor, coworkers, the police, her boyfriend, and so on.

* Lawyers, please note that I’m not saying anything about the methods of actual reporters or the companies they work for. Please don’t sue me.

When it comes to her actual reporting, however—in print, podcast, and elsewhere—Petra is much more honest. Bowing to editorial pressure she may say something earlier than she should* and while she never lies, she sure edges close to it. Her scripts feature incredibly well-chosen words—true, but open to interpretation.

* There are a few hundred words I could write about other journalistic ethical moves here, but I’d be getting sidetracked.

The journalism—both in print and in the podcast—we see here is very likely what fills our screens and earbuds. It’s sensationalistic, click-driven, and not necessarily all that honest. It’s depressing to think about, and it’s not great to read about if you think about it in those terms—but it makes for a thrilling (and realistic) read. Still, I think I need to go watch Deadline – U.S.A. or something to restore my faith in humanity.

The Alt-Right Depiction

Thanks to Livvy’s online persona, even now, she has a good number of fans. Many of those fans are not happy about Petra’s podcast—and make that displeasure well known online. At least one goes further than that. Between them and Livvy’s videos (and other online activities), Witten has to walk a careful line—he needs to depict them in an honest and believable way without turning them into a convenient punching bag for a reader or character to spend a lot of time venting about their politics (perhaps even himself). Or, to go in the other direction, too.

I really appreciated the restraint he showed in this regard, it’d be easy to slip here, but on the whole, he simply reports on the views espoused—sure, it’s clear that Petra and her colleagues (and many of the witnesses that talk about it) disagree with Livvy and her fans/defenders, but with only one exception, we don’t get details their differences with the alt-right views.

That exception comes from Petra having to do a deep dive into their activities and to try to interact—so it comes about organically. Even then, Witten doesn’t let Petra go too far.

I mention this to say that readers shouldn’t let the politics involved in the book dissuade them—it’s there, but it’s just part of the atmosphere. And it’s fairly evenly handled, and I can’t imagine many readers having a problem with it.

So, what did I think about Killer Story?

Early on in the novel, I made assumptions (as you do) about the kind of story that Witten was telling and what kind of things the reader should expect from the plot and characters. I was wrong on just about every point. It was a very different kind of story, the characters ended up going in directions I wouldn’t have guessed (Petra’s editor, boyfriend, and best friend were probably the exceptions to this), and every theory I had about the killing was wrong.* And the result is a richer, deeper, and more satisfying novel than what I thought I was going to get (and I anticipated this being a good one!).

* Well, almost. I did have the motive and killer right for a chapter or two, but Witten and Petra got me off of that path.

Witten’s story in last year’s Jacked was one of the higher points in a collection full of high points, and this novel solidified my appreciation for his writing. Before I got to the point where I realized that the novel wasn’t telling the story that I thought it was and shifted my expectations, I spent a good deal of time not liking the book—but I couldn’t stop reading it or thinking and talking about it when I wasn’t reading it. It was just too well done. It got under my skin. Actually, it’s still there—I can’t stop thinking about Petra and her choices. I even emailed Witten to ask a couple of questions I had about some points—points that I think the reader could have divergent opinions on, but I wanted his authorial take on it. I’ve never done this before. But I had to know—and even having his take on them, I’m chewing on it.

I’m going to be haunted by Killer Story for a bit—in the best way. If you’re looking for a mystery you can sink your teeth into and chew on, look no further.