Glinner just published the complete email exchanges with Ronson in his Substack newsletter.
Jon Ronson, 19 May, 11:59am — “A proposal”
Hey Graham,
I hope you’re well. I’ve got a proposal that I really hope you’ll be into. I’m working on a new BBC Radio 4 series about the history of the culture wars, and the people caught up in them. The series will begin in the 1970s and end today. I interview people involved in pivotal, extraordinary culture war moments during those decades. We inevitably talk about the issues, but mostly the aim is to tell human stories - nuanced, twisty-turny, emotional at times, hopefully relatable.
I’d really like to try and make one of the later episodes about you. I think it would be a great opportunity for people to hear you tell your story with plenty of space to tell it. But for it to work, you would need to be prepared to talk about your own personal journey - how you got to the place you are now. As I say, the issues will inevitably come into it, but the main aim is the personal, human story.
What do you think?? And please do keep this confidential!
Best
Jon
Graham, 19 May, 1:35pm
Dear Jon,
Don’t worry, I will keep this confidential.
I’m sorry but the fact that you were unable or unwilling to say that the ‘lesbians’ in the photos I sent you were men makes me think you’re not interested in covering this debate truthfully. If you insist on pretending you can’t tell the difference between men and women, I don’t see how you can possibly be an honest broker here.
I’ll pass, thank you. Try Julie Bindel. She has been fighting this crap for fifteen years.
Good luck with it.
Graham
Jon, 19 May, 2:02pm
Hey Graham,
Thanks for this. And nice to hear from you. I don’t think you quite understand my position though, and I’m sure I didn’t make it clear. On principle a journalist doesn’t / can’t accede to prior demands from an interviewee. “You can only interview me if I have you on record saying this…” It undermines the rules of journalism. I literally couldn’t agree, and no journalist worth their salt could. In the same way, we cannot ever pay people for interviews. You were inadvertently asking me to break rules. I can explain more if you like.
Given that this will be a high profile chance for people to hear from you, and you know that my work is never about trying to make people look bad or put people in difficult oppositional situations (I still admire the stance you took on that on the Today programme) will you at least take a day or so to think about it?
Best
Jon
Graham, 19 May, 2:08pm
Tell yourself whatever you want, Jon, but pretending you can’t tell the difference between men and women for ideological reasons is not a good starting point for someone covering this issue. I’ll pass.
Jon, 19 May, 2:17pm
Well I don’t get it - you were really angry when Katie Herzog and Jesse Singal wouldn’t have you on. And by the way I’m not telling myself whatever I want. We are not allowed to accede to demands like that in order to get access. Imagine if you were writing a comedy and you had to agree in writing in advance to certain purity tests. You would rightly feel agreeing to do so would undermine your integrity.
Well, I’m here if you change your mind, and my offer stands!
Jon
Graham, 19 May, 4:19pm
This will be edited. If you want to have a live discussion, which is how I presumed Jesse and Katie would do it, I’d consider that. And I still say that asking you to confirm that you believe in biological reality is not the ethical breach you’re claiming. Most people who haven’t placed a bet on this ludicrous ideology would have no problem answering. They’re obviously men, Jon. Think of what kind of journalism you’re practising by pretending you don’t know that.
Jon, 19 May, 6:45pm
Honestly, Graham, no reputable journalist who isn’t also an activist could ever agree in advance to state for the record the interviewee’s ideological position as a prerequisite to access. It’s unheard of. It breaks every rule of journalism.
It isn’t a live show. Actually, Katie and Jesse Singal’s show isn’t live either. What I can promise is an earnest, curious, humanistic attempt to understand why your life took the course it has. It would hopefully be intelligent and sensitive. My show is endeavoring to not be a part of the culture wars, and while I would of course - during any sections where we discuss the issues - have to challenge and question your position, I wouldn’t be coming at you as an antagonist. Just someone trying to understand… As I say, I would really like the interview to be as cordial as possible...
Graham, 19 May, 6:54pm
Sorry, Jon, my base requirement for a journalist is that he believes in biological reality. If I talk to you, then I have to start talking to historical revisionists etc.
Jon, 19 May, 6:57pm
Well if you ever want to screw over a journalist, just tell the world that they took and passed your required purity test!!
Graham, 19 May, 7:37pm
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. I’ll keep a record of all journalists who fly into a panic upon being asked about the birds and the bees. If it’s more than just Jesse and Katie, I’ll reconsider the interview.
Jon, 20 May, 9:41am
I don’t know what you mean by “If it’s more than just Jesse and Katie, I’ll reconsider the interview.” I’m not interviewing Jesse and Katie.
Graham, 20 May, 4:11pm
let’s forget it Jon. Again, try Julie Bindel. She’s been fighting it for around 15 years and I’d love to see her reaction when you tell her you can’t tell the difference between a lesbian and a man.
Bye.
G
Jon, 20 May, 4:13pm
Thanks graham. You know, you can’t go through life forcing people to pay fealty to you. I say this as a (sort of) friend.
Graham, 20 May, 4:25pm
Here’s a prediction. I’ll be freely talking about this period in a few years while you’ll pretend you were on an extended holiday. Fealty to me. You’re a journalist. How about fealty to the truth? I won’t speak to any journalist who pretends to believe that Eddie Izzard is the same sex as his mum. How can you live with yourself?
Jon, 20 May, 4:28pm
There’s a lot I can say to this, but what I will say is: I’m sorry your wound is so deep that you can’t find a way to heal and resume a more varied life. I hope you find a way. You can still be as GC as you like, but it will be a hell of a lot better for you and for everyone if you manage it.
Jon, 20 May, 4:30pm (follow-up)
Oh, PS, the last time you said you didn’t know how I can live with myself and look my wife in the eye it was a funny misunderstanding! I was talking about Phoenix Jones!
Graham, 20 May, 4:37pm
My God do you have any idea what they’re doing to children? Fuck off, Jon.
Jon, 20 May, 5:53pm
Speaking of children, as soon as I told you I felt you were acting like a bully, a bunch of your fellow travelers started tweeting that I was a pedophile. Nice company, Graham. Nice way to get people on your side. And, by the way, if you start accusing people who aren’t pedophiles of being pedophiles you devalue the term, and I’m not sure that’s a very good idea.
Graham, 20 May, 6:15pm
Yeah imagine if we started muddying the meanings of words. From the bloke who thinks ‘women’ means ‘women and some men’.
And grooming is the perfect word for this. Look at you, FFS. They’re men, Jon. In the photos. It’s genuinely frightening that you can’t say that.
And listen, we can keep going back and forth, but anything beyond this email goes outside our confidentiality agreement. I’d be happy to continue this discussion in public, otherwise, I want to stop hearing from you.
Jon, 20 May, 7:08pm
Ok, fair enough. I apologize for being a little snippy and you won’t hear from me again. I really do wish you well.
Jon
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/full-email-exchange-with-jon-ronson