be-if they were, they would be in a constant state of discovery and evaluation and would never know for sure which stories to pursue. As far back as 1922, columnist Walter Lippmann, in his book Public Opin- ion, pointed out that "for the most part, we do not first see and then define, we define and then see." The world is simply too complicated to do otherwise. Good reporters and editors make swift but compli- cated judgments, within the context of conclusions they have already reached, to capture what Carl Bernstein has called "the best available version of the truth. "6 The best journalists are always prepared to be surprised and to adjust their worldview. But one reporter who covered us for the New York Times once expressed great frustration that his story's angle had often been predetermined by an editor who had, at Tough Calls best, a passing acquaintance with our industry. The reporter's job was to do the legwork and flesh it out. On major stories, reporters invariably want to speak to the top guy, if only because doing SO sells magazines and newspapers. CEOs on the covers of business magazines are the equivalent of Britney Spears on the tabloids at the supermarket checkout counter. As improbable as it may sound, evolutionary psychologists say that our obsession with celebrities is hard-wired, a vestige of tribal gossip in the mating rituals of the savanna. The gossip-worthy are no longer just the buxom and fertile, but also the socially prominent. Just as bosomy starlets appear to have been bred to nurse a brood, and muscular hunks to drag meals back to the campfire, business celebrities are good pro- spective mates because they're successful and usually rich. As science writer William Allman once pointed out, our modern skulls house a Stone Age mind. And that mind is connected to a wallet that buys newspapers and magazines. Furthermore, as business has become more complicated, investors have turned their attention to something they think they ought to be able to understand: the people running the company,