The New York Times has come under fire from critics today for posting an overly empathetic 5,500-word profile of Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes. Despite the backlash, the writer, Amy Chozick, may have provided the clearest understanding yet of how Holmes captivated investors, business partners, and the US media, before the Wall Street Journal blew the lid on her company beginning in late 2015.
Holmes has not talked to the media since 2016, but Chozick was granted access to the charismatic and highly persuasive founder, her romantic partner, Billy Evans, and their two children, as well as Holmes’s parents and others in her orbit. Chozick’s piece describes how Holmes pulled out all the stops to charm her, including inviting her to join them for Mexican food at their rental home on the Pacific coast, visiting the San Diego Zoo together, and offering her croissants, berries, and coffee made by Evans.
As Chozick writes, “I realized that I was essentially writing a story about two different people. There was Elizabeth, celebrated in the media as a rock-star inventor whose brilliance dazzled illustrious rich men, and whose criminal trial captivated the world. Then there is ‘Liz,’ (as Mr. Evans and her friends call her), the mom of two who, for the past year, has been volunteering for a rape crisis hotline. Who can’t stomach R-rated movies and who rushed after me one afternoon with a paper towel to wipe a mix of sand and her dog’s slobber off my shoe.”
The article portrays Holmes as someone who managed to make many powerful people bend to her will, with former Theranos employee and whistleblower Tyler Shultz telling CBS News early last year that “Elizabeth is a very, very charismatic person. When she speaks to you, she makes you feel like you are the most important person in her world in that moment. She almost has this reality distortion field around her that people can just get sucked into.”
Despite Chozick’s initial admiration for Holmes, her editors ultimately had to snap her out of her trance. And as Chozick worked her way through a list of Holmes’s friends, family, and longtime supporters, she discovered that not everyone believed everything Holmes said.
As the article ends, Chozick marvels at how much more time Holmes and Evans want to spend with her, inviting her to join them for yet another dinner and asking if she would like to come back to the zoo with her own family. “I appreciated their hospitality,” she writes, “but I didn’t fully understand it. Usually interview subjects can’t wait to get rid of me.” Ultimately, Chozick’s article offers an intriguing look into the complex personality of Elizabeth Holmes and how she managed to deceive so many people.
