First Take: As in a scientific experiment, in journalism the “subject” refers to the person both (1) about whom a reporter writes, and also (2) with whom they commonly formed his primary research relationship. As in, for instance, the “subject” of an interview, or a profile.

Deeper: If, however, both components of this term would seem necessary to its full meaning for narrative journalism, both are not always in play. Some reporters form little more than superficial relationships with some sources, and often the person at the heart of some profiles is merely a vehicle for topical issues. (Indeed, in daily reporting, some editors discourage a personal relationship.)  Personal closeness, in other words, cannot always follow from writing about someone or using them as a source.
           Meanwhile, though the term “subject” has some scientific connotations, they often don’t apply in narrative journalism. Rather, the label “subject” seems to have migrated into journalistic practice mainly as a way to qualify the aura of detachment the term habitually carries. Paradoxically, in fact, the term actually connotes more autonomy than we might expect. Indeed, it is often used to point to the fuller human dignity, and even the implicit rights (e.g. to privacy or anonymity), of those under journalistic inspection (for example, vulnerable subjects such as victims of crime, or children). Understanding such tensions with the craft may partly explain some of the recurring contradictions of the journalistic craft: why, for instance, journalists are often professionally prohibited from forming personal relationships with subjects, even though deeply complex interactions do often result. Or, on the flip side, why journalists commonly speak of writing in their subjects’ best interests (see the entry on witnessing), even though–on first amendment grounds, not unusually–they also commonly resist the formal oversight of university-based “human subject” ethical reviews.  

Recommending reading: Janet Malcolm, The Journalist and the Murderer (1990). I have also offered a “Short Take” on Malcolm in the section under that name.