Sunday, April 06, 2008

disrupting fact and fiction

Thinking about thinking

Every 15 minutes televised news programs serve the daily dose of updates from around the world in easy to swallow, sweeping sound bites. We drool over the simplicity of the ideas, the absolute certainty of our leaders, and the conviction that now we, too, know. However, as the cynic inside scratches through my confident cocoon, I often find myself wondering where the line between fluff and fact is drawn.
In the competitive world of media it seems that truthfulness and allure must reach a compromise. In reporting and politics, where an uneven balance carries heavy consequences, the compromise is especially pertinent. The American government claims Iran is building nuclear weapons. Iran flatly denies the statement. Whose story is more trustworthy?
I have no doubt that in the fast-paced, marketing-driven environment of media and politics hard facts can accidentally be replaced by attractive rumors. However, I never imagined that the same kind of disruption could tumble the romantic walls of my literary stronghold.
That is until early March revealed the literary world was infiltrated by a very convincing liar. Margaret Seltzer’s autobiographical gang memoir, “Love and Consequences,” under the pen name Margaret B. Jones, was shamefully exposed as a largely fictitious work.
Seltzer went to great lengths to convince editors and reporters that her “autobiographical” work represented the truth. She provided witnesses and photographs to corroborate her story. Even in the wake of James Frey’s “A Million Little Pieces” which ruffled Oprah’s feathers two years ago, Seltzer was never suspected.
Ironically, before Seltzer was exposed, a reviewer for the New York Times said, “Although some of the scenes she has recreated from her youth… can feel self-consciously novelistic at times, Ms. Jones has done an amazing job of conjuring up her old neighborhood.”
Nevertheless, the publisher is cancelling Seltzer’s book tour and recalling nearly 19,000 copies of the book.
Yet, when it was agreed that weapons of mass destruction were not being hidden in Iraq, troops were not recalled. President Bush continued his tour promoting the fight for freedom and the seemingly false allegations provided justification for a war. The public only revolts when an author fictionalizes her memoir.
The question this raises is—where does responsibility lie? Critics of the memoir debacles blame the publishers and editors for poor investigative practices. I say more power to the author for pulling one past us all. Oprah and other embarrassed readers need to get over themselves. Stop attacking the author and put responsibility back in the hands of the reader. The public’s naïve complacency and then sudden outrage upon learning it has been duped by an author is almost comical. Is the American public afraid to think, to take responsibility?
This critique may be reasonable in the memoir debate. Though again, it seems necessary to hold the news media to a more stringent code of conduct. In the case of politicians and reporters’ words, the public needs to be assured they are receiving genuine information.
Absolute dependence upon the media to report the ‘facts’ is necessary, but prone to invite trouble. How can “The Truth” be regulated? How can a single individual, a student in Huntingdon, determine the truth about an event taking place halfway around the globe?
Seltzer’s editor admits that she made the mistake of relying upon the author as a sole source of information. Ideally, the individual and the media can avoid this by gathering news and information from various sources. Yet, is there really any objective perspective?
The transfer of information nearly always requires a constructed narrative. In a capitalist society - or a democracy dependent upon public opinion – marketing often takes center stage. It is both liberating and frightening to play with these ideas. Sometimes I can only laugh, unsure if I should be disgusted or elated. It may be that the truth is only a story told by the most convincing liar.

*ryan hamilton - From April 3 Juniatian

No comments: