In light of Sarah Palin’s book release, a question arose: What is real? I’m not referring to Real Salt Lake’s improbable run to the MLS Cup Final, I refer to our ability to know what is actual.

"Real"

A story in the 20 November, 2009 New Yorker; an interview with a reviewer for the Michelin Guide, asked the same question. In the article, an anonymous Michelin writer described the thorough training that qualifies them to adequately award stars (or not) to restaurants fortunate enough to receive consideration.

Contrast this training with the writers for the Zagat Restaurant Survey. Zagat’s procedure for reviews is that they come from anonymous diners. These writers are to remain anonymous. Readers of the Zagat Guides have no idea if a specific writer has an agenda in praising (or damning) an eatery.

In the case of Michelin v. Zagat, readers have the option of reading one expert opinion (Michelin), or several lay opinions (Zagat).

Nancy Pearl, America’s librarian, spoke of her frustration with book reviewers, especially those from the New York Times. Her difficulty lies in the reviewers’ explaining the plot, and not discussing the craft. She was asked about “everyman” reviews found on websites such as Amazon.com. She dismissed these as uninformed and messy (my paraphrase). She said one must read several to get a sense of a book’s worthiness.

Again, we have the option to read one or many to arrive at the same place.

With the closing of newspapers across the country, the places we can go to find experts is decreasing. Bloggers are everywhere. Newspapers, including online-only periodicals (such as the Seattle Post-Intelligencer), have much more content from bloggers. The impression is bloggers are more “real” and actually there. In much the same way reporters were viewed before the internet gave everyone an equal voice. Bloggers are generally not held to the same literary standards as reporters. To whom must they be responsible? Who checks their truths?

(Fabwick understands the underlying irony of this article. How do you know the qualifications of this writer? How “real” is this?).

We now rely more on documentary films and books for news. Much of the frustration with Going Rogue is Sarah Palin’s explanation of her experiences during the 2008 presidential campaign. Her view on what happened is so different than that of others who were there. Of course she can write whatever she wants to write. She has the right to grind as many axes as she wishes. Given a different climate, much of the furor about truth and reality in her story would have never risen. In this time when we clamor for truth, her words rile us.

Actual

In sharp contrast to Palin’s book is Deborah Scranton’s excellent documentary: The War Tapes. It is a film of New Hampshire National Guard soldiers filming their own battles. This is as true as it gets. This type of reporting has no attempt to be objective. It shows what happened from the point of view of the participants and allows us to see it at the same time.