Fact or Fiction

All libraries and bookstores, if not most, have two distinct sections, fiction and non-fiction. One will most certainly find classic literature works such as Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen on a shelf in the Fiction Section while another book, say Post Capitalist Society by Peter Drucker, in the Non-Fiction section. An easier way is of course to look up the catalogue wherein a particular book will be listed as FIC (for fiction) or NON-FICTION, as simple as that.

What about journalism? At an individual level, this may be nebulous as the perception may range from the absolute fact and wide right to the absolute fiction, but mostly somewhere within the spectrum with a shade of both. I’m sure each of us has our own opinion as to the veracity of any news published in the newspapers and news periodicals.

Before we delve further, let’s look at some “authoritative” definitions. According to Wikipedia, fiction is “story telling of imagined events and stands in contrast to non-fiction, which makes claims about reality”. While the first part is straightforward and unambiguous, the latter part sounds ambivalent to me. What is making claim? Substantiated by fact?

Let’s look at non-fiction then. Wikipedia says, “non-fiction is an account or representation of a subject which is presented as fact.” So Wikipedia is being consistent, non-fiction is indeed antithetical to fiction. But then it gets dicey (it always does) as Wikipedia goes on to qualify that “this presentation may be accurate or not; that is, it can give either a true or false account of the subject in question”. So while non-fiction represents, or rather presents, fact, it does not have to be accurate.

Isn’t inaccurate fact an oxymoron? But let’s put that aside as the focus here is fact versus fiction, and that the fiction and non-fiction pair is the opposite of each other is generally not in dispute.

That leaves journalism, described as “a discipline of collecting, analyzing, verifying, and presenting news regarding current events, trends, issues and people” in Wikipedia. For now we will take that as reporting reality that can be verified, independently of course.

Now let’s take some real, or published, cases and examine, at perhaps the level of gut feeling, their status vis-à-vis the fact-to-fiction continuum.

Firstly, The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown. A check at the catalogue of a local library lists that as “FIC”. So that’s that. Why then is there a hue and cry that the book is inaccurate since it is supposedly a work of fiction? I looked up my copy and note that it has a Fact page (in a book of fiction at that) and apparently some of the controversy surrounds this page, which, again quoting Wikipedia, “is in fact completely untrue and creates confusion between speculation and fact.” I must admit that since I read the book as fiction, putting my implicit trust on the local librarians to shelve it where it belongs, the only thing that I remember from reading the book is the intricate plot and the mind boggling riddles.

Then there is State of Fear by Michael Crichton, another book from the “FIC” category as well. I, too, have read the book. While I don’t agree with the fact (pardon the pun) that global warming is cast as a hoax in there, I have no problem with it since the book is, again, the work of fiction. Then I read in the Forum article entitled “Petroleum Geologists‘ Award to Novelist Crichton Is Inappropriate” in EOS (Vol. 87, No. 36, 5 September 2006), a weekly EOS Transaction of the American Geophysical Union, that The American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) had given Michael Crichton its 2006 Journalism Award for his novels Jurassic Park and State of Fear, citing the bestowment for those who have contributed to the public understanding of geology. Then he was invited to testify before the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, purportedly as an expert witness against global warming, at the risk of slighting the painstaking peered review research based on scientific investigation. The authors of the article, representing the Council of the American Quaternary Association (AMQUA), contented that “Crichton has blurred the line between fiction writer and scientific expert, using his novel as a springboard to influence public policy.” The article went on to quote AAPG Communications Director, Larry Nation, who famously said, “It is fiction, but it has the absolute ring of truth.”

Doesn’t that muddle the water even further?

On a more balanced note, as reported in Tampa Bay Times (tbt) of Oct 6, 2006, The Weather channel has taken the position that global warming is happening, people are contributing to it, and it's a big problem and has launched a weekly program, The Climate Code with Dr. Heidi Cullen, to explain climate change to a mass audience.

Analogous to “Climate is what you expect; weather is what you get,” as opined by Dr. Cullen, would we be deluged with more of “Fact is what you expect; fiction is what you get”?