[Bbang Gubneun Tajagi] The Truth About 'Facts' in the Era of Fake News

On the 26th of last month, the second trial verdict in the public official election law violation case involving Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, sparked another wave of controversy under the theme of ‘photos and manipulation.’ This was because the court judged that the photo presented as evidence by the prosecution had been manipulated. The photo was not the original but an enlarged portion of it. The ruling party immediately reacted with backlash. Criticisms included remarks such as, "Even parking violation fine notices send enlarged photos, so does that mean manipulated photos exempt you from paying fines?" and "Don’t use close-up photos of specific individuals in articles; they could be considered photo manipulation."

Setting aside the ambiguous legal reasoning and political rhetoric, this controversy left us with another point to ponder. Where is the boundary between intervention for clarity and sharpness and intentional distortion? Simply put, this is a question about the essence of what we call ‘fact.’ The book The Lifespan of a Fact provides an answer to that question.

The book’s structure is unique. It contains the actual debates and conversations between author John D’Agata and Jim Fingal, a fact-checker for the magazine The Believer.

"Please clarify this point... Sir, would you be willing to revise this part?" (Jim Fingal)

"Why should I revise that? I see no problem... You’re really trying to ruin the essay with absurd nitpicking." (John D’Agata)

The origin of the dispute lies in an incident and D’Agata’s submitted manuscript about it. On July 13, 2002, sixteen boys died by jumping from a casino hotel in Las Vegas, USA. As a nonfiction writer, D’Agata wrote an in-depth essay exploring the incident. However, his manuscript was rejected by the first media outlet, citing “too many factual errors beyond repair.” The magazine The Believer accepted D’Agata’s manuscript, but with one condition: it would undergo thorough fact-checking within The Believer.

The debates in the book often focus on seemingly trivial details: the number of traffic lights in Las Vegas, the distance at the suicide scene, the color of a particular building, and so on. D’Agata believes that changing these ‘minor’ facts does not affect the essential truth of the essay. However, to Fingal, each of these ‘small lies’ is a crack that undermines the overall story’s credibility. The editorial team’s persistent questioning of “Is this part factual?” and the author’s stance that “truth lies not in trivial facts but behind them” escalate to an irreconcilable level. The book is essentially a record of that ‘war.’

The intense, sometimes wry and mocking confrontation between the author and the fact-checker does not reach a clear conclusion. The conflict remains unresolved and ends with yet another question. It reminds us that truth is not ultimately obtained by anyone’s judgment but must reside with the reader themselves. It reads like a hint that ‘critical thinking’ is essential in an era flooded with fake news. The common praise from critics for this book was that it “makes readers think.” When it was published in 2012, it was already a hot topic, but its significance has deepened in today’s ‘fake news’ era. Amid the flood of content and the development of social media, modern people are exposed to more information than ever before, yet finding the truth has become even more difficult.

The Lifespan of a Fact / John D’Agata & Jim Fingal / Translated by Seo Jeong-ah / Geulhangari / 20,000 KRW