3 ms·
A long, well-written review that is ultimately worthless as the author is clearly biased due to being related to the subject of the book. A good illustration of
by Grue3 13y ago
A long, well-written review that is ultimately worthless as the author is clearly biased due to being related to the subject of the book. A good illustration of the importance of context vs content.
- afandian 13y agoI disagree. As commenter K. Mitnick put it: The authors are entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to "their own facts".
- phorese 13y ago> commenter K. Mitnick "Ken Mitnick" btw, not Kevin. Just in case anyone wondered. Like I did-
- winstonian 13y agoThe Ghost himself!
- Grue3 13y agoClaims by biased entities are not facts. In fact, it's almost always the opposite.
- lsaferite 13y agoUnfortunately, everyone is biased in some way or another. That mixed with your logic means the whole book is fiction, right? The reality of it is that being biased doesn't mean you cannot make factual statements. It does mean you may highlight facts you want and ignore facts you find inconvenient. It also means you can lie. In this case she is saying the author made statements of fact that were not true and is trying to point that out. As the book is an unofficial biography, you have to assume the likelihood of factual error is increased.
- moogleii 13y agoWhich pretty much sums up the book in question. This is circular.
- Grue3 13y agoThere is no reason for the book author to be biased. We don't know if he is biased or not. However, we know for certain that Jeff Bezos's wife is very biased. She has a horse in this race, so to speak. So whatever she says is probably to protect Jeff Bezos's reputation, not to uncover the truth.
- hga 13y agoShe also points to two other reviewers with 1st hand knowledge who dispute enough of the facts to put the book at least somewhat in doubt. E.g. the first says 80/20% correct/incorrect, which makes him wonder what 20% of the claimed facts he's not privy to are also wrong....