Liz has a nice followup to my post about kinds of honesty in which she neatly collects links to the discussion – I’ve been shockingly lax about that, I just read things and was appalled and didn’t actually link to them. Jonathon Delacour’s post is particulary interesting, and look at his description of his weblog, I like that. I’m finding some excellent weblogs through this debate.

Jt’s comment to Liz’s post sums up the problem with the truth in blogs debate, in my opinion:

Presenting fiction as fact IS dishonest, no matter how you try to justify it.

See, that’s just it. I don’t think weblogs are about facts. Obviously a lot of people do, as the Kaycee Nicole scandal and others have shown. Heck, even my recent obsession with the authenticity of the Bagdad Blogger was rather embarrassingly literal, wasn’t it? As Shelley wrote,

I’m not trying to tell you about my day, but about my life. There’s a big difference.

In a more recent post, she quoted someone else talking about Annie Dillard: “Sometimes to tell the truth you have to lie a little.”

There are long traditions for this, of course. In my family, we know perfectly well that Mum tends to embroider the truth a little, though she’ll always deny it when pushed. The rest of us do too, now and then. Such embroidery usually only makes the story better and the point clearer. Even memory embroiders the truth – are you sure you remember your own stories quite the way they really happened?

I should probably set up a disclaimer on my blog. “I endeavour to be academically trustworthy and cite my sources and so on but do not promise to be factual about my personal life.”

This is a typical debate where we should probably all just agree to disagree before it gets utterly boring.


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

5 thoughts on “embroidery

  1. jt

    My Dad and I had a discussion, in Junior High or High School, on the f-word.

    His comment was that He’d heard ALL the cuss words, but those who used them just showed exhibited their lack of ability in using creative language. So He didn’t, and my entire family has an exposed raw nerve about the f-word in particular. Especially when I use it in anger to make a point.

    We can agree to disagree, of course, Jill. But I find similar about fact as an f-word. It’s a FACT that Shell DOES try to tell the reader about Her day… Read Her blog, happens frequently.

    Now at the same time She may be writing, not ALL that obliquely at times, about the larger subject which is Her life. That’s what story-telling is about, whether in writing, speech, actions, or sublibminal thought-feelings that are not fully worded. Embellishing one’s story, but presenting it as non-fictional non-literature..

    ..Well that just indicates a LACK. A lack of creativity, not an expanded creativity.

    So MANY people are “lost in the oneness of the all” that they’re actually starting to believe the total-BS-crap meme that there is no essential difference between fiction and non-fiction. So it’s okay-fine to mix the two, and call auto-biography non-fiction if it contains totally facocted lies.

    If You say, or imply, that You’re telling a story about an event in Your life but it didn’t happen (or the re-telling is unfaithful to the events)..

    ..that’s deception.

    Most people’s memories of the past ARE embellished quite a bit… Learned that many decades ago, and the reasons the memories get clouded is because people see no advanatage to making the effort to BE Truthful.

    Perfect objectivity being impossible, in my experience it is still worth the effort to try, and to try to relate stories (that are not presented AS literature) truthfully as I can.

    Other’s can choose otherWise, but they are (in fact…;-) primarily deceiving themselves. Which is their perogative.

    Short-sited, but that seems to be acceptable in a day-and-age when hypocracy is being raised to an art form.

  2. Maggie

    Jill,

    I appreciate the creativity of your statement, “I don’t think weblogs are about facts.”

    And I don’t know the word for “blog” in other languages than English.

    But in English, as far as I know, the word “blog” is a shorthand term for web-log.

    For a very long time, the verb “to log” has meant to record–and I do think factuality (as far as it can exist) has been part of that definition. (I believe that’s how someone who “logs” would be different, say, someone recording a musical performance.)

    Personally I’m undecided about the interest value of deliberately-created fuzzy places between fact and fiction. And therefore, I guess, of the value of non-truth in blogs. The energy *around* these deliberately-created fuzzy places (i.e., reactions, debates) often seems to me much more interesting than the actual objects of discussion. But I’m trying to stay open-minded. I do want to be surprised.

    You seem very smart so I assume you’re taking the etymology into account as you discuss the idea of truth in blogs. But if not, well, for what it’s worth, there it is.

    Thanks,

    Maggie

  3. Jill

    You’ve got a point, Maggie, and I do insist on things like referencing your sources honestly with decent links and in academic matters I’d definitely not like seeing deliberate misrepresentations of what other people have said or forged empirical data or whatever.

    Perhaps “weblogs aren’t about facts” is a bit too absolute: what I meant was that I’m more interested in the ideas in weblogs than in the facts, and ideas aren’t really about fact or fiction at all. I mean, look at Alex Golub’s conversation with the Trotts – you know, the developers of MoveableType. It’s obviously not exactly factual, Mena’s a Jedi Warrior… well, I suppose that could be factual actually, but let’s assume it’s not. There’s still lots of ideas in here that possibly are conveyed all the more forcefully precisely because of the fictional dialogue.

    So I’m not really talking about weblogs deliberately tricking the readers into believing something that’s not true but arguing that the main point of some weblogs is not factual truth but expressing ideas.

  4. Maggie

    Jill,

    Yeah, I get it. I feel the same way.

    Maggie

  5. george.h.williams

    blogging the full monty
    I sit in awe this morning of the interwoven discussion going on regarding truth in blogging. I started with this post on Jill’s site, and then worked my way back and forth through various links. Not only is this a…

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Screenshot of a paragraph from a New York Times article published May 12, 2026. Text reads: "The price of tomatoes -tart bursts of flavor in salads and sandwiches — surged nearly 40 percent in April from a year ago on a combination of bad weather, high tariffs and climbing transportation costs."
AI STORIES

Genre glitches and unexpected promotional phrases as a sign of AI writing

A genre glitch is a characteristic of LLM-assisted writing where the text suddenly switches genre, typically inserting a short promotional phrase full of sensory details into an informational text. Genre glitches occur when a word in the generated text is heavily associated with a genre or context that is markedly […]

Top of a ransom note from Shinyhunters hacking group. Text reads: "SHINYHUNTERS rooting your systems since '19 ;) ShinyHunters has breached Instructure (again). Instead of contacting us to resolve it they ignored us and did some "security patches"."
Networked Politics University politics

UiB self-hosts the open source version of Canvas, so wasn’t affected by the breach

On May 1st Canvas announced a security breach, and then yesterday the system was hacked. The login page was replaced by a ransom note: if universities don’t pay up by 12 May, student data will be released. Here’s what the login page looked like yesterday: Way back in 2015, when […]

AI and algorithmic culture Networked Politics

AI-generated images, fascist aesthetics: Dieselbrølet and Heimatstrom

My German is pretty dodgy, so when I first saw Heimatstrom on Bluesky, shared by Roland Meyer, a professor of visual culture at Universität Zürich’s Digital Society Initiative, I misinterpreted it and thought it was a far-right campaign. But no, Heimatstrom is a group of left-wing environmentalists using fascist AI […]

Photo of a billboard ad at Oslo S train station showing a smiliing conductor and the text "Du må ikke sove. Joda, bare sov du."
AI STORIES

“Du må ikke sove”: a floating motif detached from its meaning (or: LLMs can write Norwegian but miss cultural references)

There’s a new ad for the train between Stavanger and Oslo in Norway that uses a line from Arnulf Øverland’s famous anti-fascist poem Du må ikke sove (“You must not sleep”). Du må ikke sove, you must not sleep, the ad says. And then it flips it, jovially, joda, bare […]

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. ,  If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics).  This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.