Posted on 01/12/2006 3:14:17 AM PST by BlessedBeGod
Oprah Winfrey broke her silence about James Frey's disputed memoir of addiction, "A Million Little Pieces," dismissing allegations of falsehoods as "much ado about nothing" and urging readers who have been inspired by the book to "Keep holding on."
"What is relevant is that he was a drug addict … and stepped out of that history to be the man he is today and to take that message to save other people and allow them to save themselves," Winfrey said Wednesday night in a surprise phone call to CNN's Larry King, who was interviewing Frey on his live television program.
Frey has been under intense scrutiny since The Smoking Gun, an investigative Web site, posted a story last Sunday alleging the author had substantially fabricated his criminal record and other aspects of his past.
Publishers, writers and readers have offered their opinions, but none mattered so much as Winfrey's. Her selection last fall of "A Million Little Pieces" for her book club made the memoir a million seller and she might have fatally ruined Frey's reputation by condemning him.
Frey, in his first interview since The Smoking Gun story came out, acknowledged he had embellished parts of the book but said that was common for memoirs and defended "the essential truth" of "A Million Little Pieces."
"The book is about drug addiction and alcoholism," he said. "The emotional truth is there."
Frey received another endorsement Wednesday night, from his mother, Lynne, who appeared with him during the latter part of the program. ''I believe in James,'' she said. ''The book stands on its own.''
Frey's book was first published in 2003. He has been challenged before about passages describing such things as his receiving root canal surgery without anesthesia and boarding a commercial plane covered in blood and vomit.
But the Smoking Gun's story was by far the most thorough. Relying on extensive documentation, the Smoking Gun disputed everything from Frey's claim to having served three months in jail to being blamed for a car crash that killed two students while in high school.
''Police reports, court records, interviews with law enforcement personnel, and other sources have put the lie to many key sections of Frey's book,'' according to the article that appeared on www.thesmokinggun.com.
Winfrey herself acknowledged the vagaries of memoirs, saying Wednesday night she knows that maybe ''the names and the dates and times have been compressed.'' She said she hoped the controversy would inspire further debate.
''I rely on the publishers to define the category that a book falls within, and also [for] the authenticity of the work,'' she said.
Oprah just doesn't want to admit she ain't GOD and didn't know someone was lying. All praise Oprah.
Once again a Liberal illustrates that facts aren't important to them.
As long as Okra thinks he's a good guy. The same applied to the left with Bill Clinton. They didn't let a little thing like rape and abusing women get in the way of their admiration.
Next thing you know we'll all find out that John Kerry wasn't a genuine traitor.
Didn't we learn anything from Dan Rather? It didn't matter that the documents were fakes, What mattered was they supported what Dan knew in his heart to be the truth, and we can't be bothered with minor issues like authenticity.
Likewise, Frey is telling a story that The Oprah wants to believe is true, so if 95% is made up that's OK.
Facts are downright inconvient sometimes, so some of us (Dan and The Oprah) have learned that the truth can be flexible, as long as it is what we already know in our hearts to be true.
This whole story is sickening (no pun intended with respect to his vomiticiousness) -- the book is listed in the Non-Fiction rankings. It is a book of Fiction. It *does* make a difference.
And Frey himself is lame.
The Smoking Gun, welcome to the postmodern world. You can make a logical case brilliantly (which you did), and the facts won't matter because a whole segment of the population "feels" the story is right.
If I were a lawyer, I could make a ton of money playing off people like this.
Journalists in the dock
It's time for real punishment for ethical breaches by media
By Thomas Kostigen, MarketWatch
Last Update: 12:03 AM ET Jan. 12, 2006
SANTA MONICA, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- Journalists and writers should be fined, penalized and even prosecuted for their ethical breaches.
More than the prospect of shame, job loss or ostracism, journalists and writers should have to face criminal or civil consequences like everyone else.
We hold accountable politicians -- and fine, penalize and prosecute them, as the Jack Abramoff case exemplifies. We hold accountable business executives -- and fine, penalize, and prosecute them, as the Martha Stewart case (among many others) exemplifies.
Recent breaches of media ethics, however, haven't produced nearly as serious repercussions. Lapses in reporting by the New York Times may have instigated a war. And author James Frey, who wrote "A Million Little Pieces," seems to have dashed the hope and courage he gave millions with his alleged fabrications of events in his book.
Journalists and writers who hold themselves out as telling the truth should face punishment for telling lies. Thirty years ago Bruce Swain wrote a manual entitled "Reporter's Ethics," in which he writes "handling of ethics that arise in their work remains a matter of personal integrity for individual reporters with or without recourse to a written code."
It's now time for some recourse. It's now time for a written and enforceable code.
A survey released this week shows business editors are "dissatisfied" with ethics at their own magazines. They cite blurred lines between advertising and editorial and increased pressure for "product placement" in articles. Just over one-third of the magazines surveyed by the American Society of Business Publication editors said they have in place a formal ethics code. Yet 22% were aware of ethical violations among their editorial staff.
This is disturbing because it shows the lack of consideration given to ethics. Moreover, without a code, to what are journalists and writers accountable?
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for free speech, just not false speech. And I'm not saying the government should hold sway over news organizations; as the fourth estate, the media is part of the system of checks and balances system for our country. However, when you buy a product and it's bad, you can return the product or, if the case is heinous enough, file a lawsuit. There is no such recourse with information.
Someone asked me if James Frey would have to return the money he got for his book or be held accountable for returns. That isn't such a bad idea. Perhaps even newspaper reporters who intentionally mislead readers should have to refund subscription money.
The writing world has gotten too lax and its reach -- with the advent of the Internet -- is far beyond and more immediate than anything printing-press inventor Gutenberg could have imagined.
Last fall, the Gallup organization interviewed more than 50,000 people in 68 countries on the issue of trust. It said the poll represents the views of 1.3 billion people worldwide. Politicians are the least trusted, while religious leaders are the most, it says. In between fall journalists who rank the same as the military/police, Gallup found.
As defenders of rights and freedoms and the harbingers of free will and expression, media outlets have a duty to us all. There is a responsibility that goes along with the privilege of being opinion-makers and agents of change.
That's why publishing organizations should have to live up to different standards than individual bloggers. If you read this report or the New York Times, you should know you are getting a different standard of writing than Johnny Weirdo's blog on Pamela Anderson. (Please, god, don't let there be a Johnny Weirdo's blog on Pamela Anderson.)
Disclosures and transparency should be made more evident. If you read this column, for example, you should understand that it is an opinion column. If an article is a news item, it should be evident as well.
The difference between fact and commentary needs to be made more apparent to readers, I believe; labeled even along with a byline.
Professional news organizations also need third-party accountability mechanisms that can be enforced. This will dissuade paparazzi infringements. It will assuage fears of ethical misconduct. And it will engender - hopefully -- a new level of trust from the public. Leaving things up to an ombudsman or an "internal review" just doesn't wash in light of the raft of ethical violations among media organizations of late.
Our legal system obtusely addresses media ethics. The enforcement mechanism on which it relies is, mostly, "malice." Absent that, almost anything goes.
That shouldn't be the case. Instead, a case has to be made for a national code of media ethics for writers and journalist to abide -- or face payback.
BTW, I hear he's threatening TheSmokingGun.com with a lawsuit. I guess it's now legally actionable to threaten someone's memoir with the truth.
Oprah's book club should stick to fiction.
Oh wait, they have.....
Snort. Threatening is the operative word there :) The SG's countersuit would bankrupt that guy.
For anyone who read the approximately 6 page expose on just how many times and about crucial information this author lied, Oprah is doing a dis-service to her readers by continuing to defend the guy.
From what I could tell, about the only thing that is correct in the book is that the guy who wrote was in deed an alcoholic and drug abuser.
But it's not about her readers, is it? It's all about Oprah.
I just have one thing to say to her readers: Suckers.
Oh, please don't confuse Oprah and her sheeple fans with the truth.
I want to get a copy of a book, say "profiles in courage", scratch out JFKs name, write in my own and send it to Okra and see if she promotes it.
They are fact of my life as I remember them and they make people feel good so it's okay, right?
There have been lots of articles about this author, but the most detailed one I read was a minimum of 6 pages long detailing his lies; he knew his book wouldn't sell as a novel but if it was true...
Oh brother. I'll bet Billy Klintoon wishes he thought of that doozy.
Maybe he wasn't even an alcoholic. Hazelden, the rehab place he said he went to, has always had a strict policy of never confirming who was a patient there. I also know people who have been there, and I myself went there to observe the place while doing a story on it, and they are very very strict about keeping men and women from social fraternizing. I find it hard to believe that the woman he says he had an affair with even existed.
Also, Oprah is always harping on the theme of how we all need to be honest and "our authentic selves." Guess the same rules don't apply to Frey.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.