From what I understand, it's a good book. I just don't understand why Margaret Seltzer didn't submit the book as fiction. Maybe she felt it wouldn't have the same appeal if it wasn't "true." In these days of internet and media coverage, how in the world did she think somebody wouldn't figure it out?

This brings up something else - when people write biographies and autobiographies, you know that there has to be license taken with things like conversations. Is it a lie to try to recount your conversation with your mother when you were twelve? Obviously, vandalizing someone else's life is just plain wrong and I agree with the previous commenter - why didn't she just submit it as fiction?

I find it hard to believe that fact-checking of the like that would have revealed this author's bald fabrication would cost much more than a few phone calls. At the same time, I am also having trouble believing that a person could be so bold as to *totally spin a yarn* and then sell it as her or his own true life. We're way past Frey territory, here. While I respect that the book world might be changed by aggressive fact checking becoming de riguer (which may or may not mean the death of handshake-type trust and relationship building), I just think the stakes are very, very high for houses that publish and also for authors who write memoirs that tell valuable stories. Every Frey, every Seltzer steals shelf space, marketing money, and column inches from people who tell the truth.

I have to wonder if it would have been published if it were submitted as fiction. The media and the public are obsessed with sensationalism. When we are more interested in Britney Spears's escapades than the war and the race for the presidency in the news, any writer's story is going to have to grab attention any way it can. Perhaps these writers are just tricking the reading public into liking fiction, the way I persuad my dog to take his pills by covering them in peanut butter. Or do I?

I can't understand why she thought she would be able to get away with it. How bold and what nerve. Clearly the publishing world should not be afraid to question a writer's truth. Come on you're paying this person money for their story, the least you can do is make a few phone calls to verify the story. And if you have serious doubts just hire a detective (may be costly but worth it) to look into the writer's background. Having to return all of those books is an expensive lesson. Didn't the publishing world learn anything with the Frey scandal? People will take advantage if you let them. Be careful. This is your business.

I think we're forgetting the obvious here. Those that submit this type of story as non-fiction, aren't just looking to write a book that gets published, they are looking for attention. Generally there is something mentally wrong with people, not only that they think it would be okay to lie about something like this, but also that they would think they would be able to get away with it. That is the main reason that we need to start aggressively fact checking. In this case publisheres wouldn't have had to even be that agressive. The entire book was a fabrication. It wouldn't have been that difficult to shoot it through of holes.

A $50 check on Intellius could have told the publisher just about all they needed to know about the woman. These days, you can practically get GPS coordinates on people with a simple Google search.