Professor ignores his own lectures

I have been a fan of Thomas C. Foster's "Professor" books since How to Read Literature Like a Professor, but he may have reached the limits of his expertise with How to Read Nonfiction Like a Professor (2020).

Partly it's a matter of nonfiction being such a broad topic, including everything from biography, history, politics and science to newspapers, magazines and blogs. It's not easy being an authority on everything. Another problem is that Foster's book, being itself nonfiction, doesn't always conform to the author's guidance on what constitutes good nonfiction.

For example, Foster writes, "I have long counseled students of fiction to start doubting the narrator's veracity if they see the word 'I' on the first page. ... The same is true of nonfiction." I am probably not the only reader to check back at the beginning of his own book. His introduction begins with the word "I." His first chapter begins with the word "I'm." (Note that this blog post also begins with the word "I.")

More serious is the professor's lecturing on objectivity or, more accurately, the lack of objectivity. He offers a lot of good instruction on how to detect an author's particular slant and judge the accuracy of statements. But then Foster himself sometimes often fails the objectivity and accuracy tests. For example, he slams Fox News repeatedly, including by saying the network "does virtually no actual news gathering, relying much more on opinion shows ..." A more objective and accurate writer might also point out that other news networks, including CNN, MSNBC and Newsmax, also depend mostly on opinion shows. And the "virtually no actual news gathering" comment is just blatantly wrong.

Foster criticizes the "fake news" label popularized by President Trump, yet he is all aboard with the misinformation and disinformation terms employed more by those on the left. Many readers may find it hard to tell the difference, other than by the political views of those telling the untruths. The author favors cracking down on misinformation and disinformation, especially in the cyber world. The problem is that most fact-checkers, being themselves biased, also need fact-checkers. And what starts out as fact-checking can easily transform into censorship.

Foster shines in many of the chapters in this book, even if he stumbles in others.