Recently a friend and I discussed whether fabrication that was not "malicious" could be acceptable. She argued that perhaps a false story could be told as fact if it were entertaining and hurt no one. Indeed, we all read fictional books and watch fictional television shows, often ones "based on a true story," so does it matter whether the events happened to the storyteller or not, or even whether they happened to anyone, provided they are entertaining? Is there a great difference, ultimately, between falsehood and truth, and is truth very important anyway?
One could argue that Bethany Storro, pictured, hurt no one but herself when she told authorities that a stranger had thrown acid on her face when she, in fact threw acid on her own face for unknown reasons (though an interview on Oprah could be one). We could laugh at her stupidity or her desperate need for attention and forget about her. However, a few days after Storro's much-publicized "attack," a woman in Arizona was actually attacked with acid, apparently the victim of a copycat attacker. Storro is not the first person to be attacked in this manner, but she is one of the few whose stories have been aired on Good Morning America. In addition to throwing various innocent Washington women under suspicion, the faker's story appears to have lead directly to a real crime. The stories we tell don't have to be true, but we should be very wary of assuming that a lie will hurt no one simply because it has no malicious intent. Storro's intent may not be clear, but the consequences of her actions certainly are.
No comments:
Post a Comment