4 ms·
I would call this historical fiction, not a biography. The author says as much (after tens of thousands of words that almost no one will read all of). Quoting s
by andrewljohnson 13y ago
I would call this historical fiction, not a biography. The author says as much (after tens of thousands of words that almost no one will read all of). Quoting someone else, he writes:
"As part of the narrative, I have included passages of dialogue. Dialogue— what words were said— is a fact like any other. It is not necessarily a quotation from an interview with me and I would discourage readers from inferring that one or both of the speakers is a direct source."
The article ends up being overwhelmingly flattering, and subtly balances the flattery by bringing up and then dispelling muckety-muck from the news, with an insider POV. And of course no one has to vouch for a word of it.
- ISL 13y agoThe disclaimer regarding dialogue may have belonged at the top of the article. I was surprised to find it at the end.
- wdewind 13y agoYou left out the next sentence of that, which completely changes the meaning A person will often share thoughts about pivotal moments in their lives with a large group of people. The author meant you should not assume that because someone is quoted that they directly spoke to him. He got some quotes from public sources.
- andrewljohnson 13y agoAnd of course you left out the weasel words thereafter: Readers should bear in mind that, given the vagaries of human memory, remembered dialogue is rarely the same as actual recordings and transcripts. At the same time, it is no more nor less accurate than many other recollections.
- wdewind 13y agoWhich means there are two types of quotes in this article: 1) Those which are public and on some kind of record and 2) Those which are recollection The quote you gave does not speak to 2, it speaks to 1 as a way to make sure people do not get confused when reading the article and think that he spoke to certain sources. It's a way of covering the source's asses. As for 2, the same standard applies to journalistic quoting in general: for instance, it is unlikely you will be able to sue someone successfully for misquoting you (ie: libel) if the general meaning of the quote is the same.
- hershel 13y agoOm malik thinks that the founder of business insider is biased: " Business Insider’s Henry Blodget, who benefits directly from the largess of Yahoo as a longtime shareholder and part time employee " So this might explain this article. And Om's take on yahoo: except for a rising share price, yahoo has achieved nothing in the past year [1]. [1]http://gigaom.com/2013/08/22/no-henry-you-need-to-get-real-about-yahoo-here-are-the-facts/ http://gigaom.com/2013/08/22/no-henry-you-need-to-get-real-a...
- plinkplonk 13y agoOm's analysis should be a submission on its own. Pretty devastating.
- samstave 13y agoThe author appears to be a Sycophant