Subscribe to my Feed
« How will the next President handle “the rise of the rest”? | Home | Bad administration is bad business! »
Was it ethical for Simon & Schuster to publish “Obama Nation”?
By Lauren | August 25, 2008
With the 2008 election nearing, it’s inevitable that voters’ interest in the candidates is increasing and the incentive to attack is growing on both sides. The latest attack on presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama comes in the form of a book by conservative Jerome Corsi titled Obama Nation that portrays Senator Obama in far from flattering terms.
Trouble is, according to the New York Times, “several of the book’s accusations are, in fact, unsubstantiated, misleading, or inaccurate,” and the Obama campaign vigorously denies Corsi’s allegations.
I’m not going to address Corsi’s representations here; he’s clearly an author with a strong point of view, and he has a First Amendment right to express it. What troubles me, however, is that Simon & Schuster, a respected New York publishing house, apparently made little or no effort to fact-check the book before publishing it. Yes, Senator Obama is a public figure (which significantly raises the legal threshhold for any defamation suit he might bring against Corsi or Simon & Schuster), but the fact that a publisher might have the legal right to publish inaccuracies doesn’t mean that it should. A publisher can make a lot of money selling sensational accusations against public figures, but what a lousy way to make a buck.
The presumptive Presidential candidates are both strong men with clearly-articulated opinions, and there’s plenty of actual differences between them without distorting their respective records and points of view. In my opinion, if Simon & Schuster chose to publish a book that could do serious damage to a Presidential candidate without taking the trouble to make sure that the allegations in that book were substantially true, the publisher seriously breached its ethical obligations to the reading public.
To read the New York Times article on “Obama Nation,” visit http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/13/us/politics/13book.html?scp=3&sq=Obama%20Nation&st=cse.
Topics: Business Ethics, Presidential Campaign, business communications, corporate responsibility, ethics |
August 30th, 2008 at 3:30 am
Lauren,
In my view, the primary responsibility relating to factual accuracy of allegations rests with the author.
However, the publisher should not publish any material which they know, or ought to have known, to contain material factual inaccuracies.
Cheers
Andrew
October 23rd, 2008 at 6:32 pm
Although the “New York Times” accused the publisher of publishing inaccurate information, who was responsible for the “New York Times” fact checks? It is a well known fact that they are one of the most biased newspapers in favor of liberal candidates. Don’t you think it may be unfair for them to accuse the author of stretching the truth while they are quite obviously in favor of Barack Obama. Did anyone do their homework to see if the “New York Times” fact checks were honorable? Or are we just going to believe what they have to say and take their word at face value?