Does art do a better job of getting to the truth than journalism? This question really stuck out to me, especially as we dig deeper into this controversy between Mike Daisey and Apple. As we all know, this question is brought up from the fact that Daisey’s emotional monologue turned out to be not quite as truthful as it is made out to be. However, even after knowing the facts, I am still touched by Daisey’s story. Why would it still have a positive affect on me if I didn’t believe it? I think this is an important point to bring up when deciding if art does in fact bring out the truth.
I decided to do a little of my own research and this article best described the thoughts I was having: “But until the radio broadcast Dasiey took part in… this problem was never discussed in such a big, public way. Daisey’s lies inspired honest questions about the gadgets in our pockets. Did he betray the trust of the public and journalists by lying?” I completely agree with this – there is a reason that I am still interested by what Daisey has to say, and I haven’t just signed him off as a complete, power-hungry liar. Without him, no one would ever know the truth!
It’s true, his lying definitely had an effect on journalists like Ira Glass on TAL because his job is to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. However, when Daisey is interviewed on Retraction, he points out that he stands by his work and that his only regret is “that he aired his show on TAL“. His story brought this controversy to the attention of millions who wouldn’t have paid it any mind had it never been discussed. So I think that, yes journalism is the best place to find FACTS, which in turn will give the truth depending on who is interpreting them. Art is not necessarily a better resource by any means, but it does a good job of putting images in people’s minds who can go on to find out however much TRUTH they want to hear.