Joshua Topolsky writing about Mike Daisey’s lies:

>Daisey’s lies inspired honest questions about the gadgets in our pockets. Did he betray the trust of the public and journalists by lying? The answer to this question is easy: Yes. But were the lies necessary?

Topolsky never comes out and clearly answers that last question, but he does say this near the end:

>Mike Daisey is not a hero, but I’m not sure he’s a villain either.
>He leaned into his lies to sell tickets to a show, to get on network TV, to make money and get famous. But along the way — either on purpose or by accident — he opened a lot of eyes.

So I can only assume that lying, in Topolsky’s eyes, can be justified if it is done so out of necessity. That’s a good reason not to read a single word Topolsky writes.

[via The Beard]

Posted by Ben Brooks