Don't bother them with facts

Sometimes when I'm working I listen to the Diane Rehm Show on NPR. I like to think of it as keeping an eye on the enemy. On Friday's second hour, which is usually time for the more or less non-political "fluff" piece, she interviewed someone who had written a book about a man named Bert Williams, who at one time was one of the most famous and wealthy celebrities alive, and who has now been almost completely forgotten. He was a vaudville performer, and was unique in that we was a black man who performed in blackface. But this post isn't about him.

The author being interviewed is named Caryl Phillips. Ms. Rehm asked him about the unusual spelling of his first name. He told a story of how his mother had taken it from someone who was very prominent in the press at about the time of his birth, named Caryl Chessman. Mr. Phillips said, "So I did some research on him a little while ago, and found that he was the most notorious mass-murderer in American history." Ms. Rehm replied, "I remember Caryl Chessman."

I had never heard of the guy. And based on certain of my interests, I would assume that I would at sometime have heard of someone who was labeled "the most notorious mass-murderer in American history." The little alarm bell in my head started clanging.

So I just Googled him. There's an example website here. At the time of his death, he caused a huge controversy over capital punishment, because he went to the gas chamber for kidnapping and rape--but not murder.

Okay, a lot of people don't think he was guilty at all, and they believe an innocent man was executed. But that isn't the point of this post. The point is--and you can Google his name yourself and try to find one mention of it--Caryl Chessman was never convicted for, nor even accused of, murder. He was convicted of kidnap and rape. Why then, does this "author" on this radio show think he was "the most notorious mass-murderer in the history of America" and why didn't Ms. Rehm correct him if she really remembered the man?

Maybe because they are both more interested in putting on a show than in verifying the truth.

I had originally thought this book about Bert Williams might be an interesting read, even though it is a "fictionalized account" of his life. Now I wouldn't read it if it were given to me for free.

As I've said before on other topics, they can't even get one simple fact right.