« Previous | Main | Next »

Chicago Sun-Times on Obama's Book: 'What's Real, What's Not'

January 16, 2007 3:09 PM

Obama_book_nr The Chicago Sun-Times columnist who got the scoop on Barack Obama's presidential announcement today is the same reporter who earlier raised serious questions about the facts in Obama's much-praised autobiography that was the No. 1 bestseller in the country.

Lynn Sweet, the savvy Chicago political columnist who's been tracking Obama's rise, called into question Obama's use of composite characters and made-up names in his highly praised autobiography.

Her 2004 column on the subject was headlined "Obama's Book: What's Real, What's Not."

"I was dismayed," wrote Sweet, "at what I found when I read Dreams from My Father. Composite characters. Changed names...Except for public figures and his family, it is impossible to know who is real and who is not."

"Colorful characters populate the Chicago chapters: Smitty the barber, LaTisha, the part-time manicurist, Angela, Ruby, Mrs. Turner and one Rafiq al Shabazz. Who they really are, or if they are composites, you would not know from reading the book."

Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage.

As Sweet noted in her article, in the introduction of the book, Obama does disclose to his readers the use of composite characters "for the sake of compression" and also says that other than his family and public figures, other characters' "names have been changed to protect their privacy."

In one example, Obama writes at length about his first boss "Marty Kaufman," recalling dozens of detailed conversations in direct quotes and mentioning his name more than 40 times.

Sweet questioned Obama about Kaufman's true identity and the other composites in the book in an interview just prior to the 2004 Chicago Democratic Convention. Obama said that while he couldn't remember all the real names, he said "Marty Kaufman" was really "Gerald Kellman," his first boss at the Calumet Community Religious Conference in Chicago.

Sweet tracked down Kellman who had no complaints about his portrayal in the book. "I think Barack was very accurate not only about myself but other people that I knew," Kellman told the reporter.

"That's reassuring," wrote Sweet, "but most readers do not have the ability to call around to try to sort out the fictional characters from real people."

Obama's response? "'I say in the book it is my remembrances of what happened,' Obama told me [Sweet]. I don't set it out as reportage...read the book for what it is worth.

'You reconstruct your memory for what happened. It is not reportage. It is not appearing in the New York Times or the Sun-Times. I say that explicitly in the book.'"

When reached by ABC News today, a spokesman for Sen. Obama first tried to find out if the Chicago Sun-Times story was being "pitched" to ABC by a rival campaign, and after being told that was not the case, the spokesman declined to comment for the record. "It was a non-story then, and it's a non-story now. Let the book speak for itself,"  he said.

January 16, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (108)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

This is off track reporting. He admitted using composite characters. Nothing hidden, nothing untoward, just a book about a pol coming of age. There is no nobility in attacking a person for doing right, just to do it. There are so many bad pols taking bribes from lobbyists, not doing their jobs and just plain lying to the people, why arem't Lynn Sweet and Brian Ross going after them?

Posted by: Charlie | Jan 16, 2007 4:55:03 PM

you know, I normally find a lot of the partisan drudgery of the comments sections on these reports to be rather repulsively distorted.

however, I must agree with the consensus here. It feels as though this was put on the main page to sell another page of ads (fortunately, firefox + adblock takes care of that). this really isn't news, and the angle of the headline is forced.

you guys DO do good reporting. but this is rehashed, and non-newsworthy.

Please remove this from the top five stories on the mainpage.

Posted by: jason p | Jan 16, 2007 4:56:22 PM

Why is this taking up space for something truly investigative? By forming a committee, he certainly opens himself up for investigation...unfortunately, this is not investigative. It's a two year old "non-story" from Chicago's junior paper.

Posted by: michael | Jan 16, 2007 4:59:48 PM

I think you're just looking to be the first to report on something negative about Obama after his decision to run. Kudos. However, could you at least write more hard core propaganda. Shame on you.

It's weak. It's partisan. It's bad media coverage. I had no idea ABC was, dare I say, racist?

Posted by: Austin | Jan 16, 2007 5:06:31 PM

Obama admits to using cocaine. Enough said, he is not worthy of the Presidency. If he used cocaine he probably used and abused other drugs as well. What kind of message does that send to our kids?

Posted by: Mark | Jan 16, 2007 5:08:14 PM

Obama or Osama I really dont know much about this guy. All I know he has done drugs in the past. I am from the South and the only person the South would vote for is John Edwards.

Posted by: Jared | Jan 16, 2007 5:18:14 PM

so the Swift-boating of Obama has already begun... wow, that was fast. It will be fascinating to watch the Pepublican slime machine clank into action and inevitably play race as a wedge issue.

Posted by: Paul | Jan 16, 2007 5:19:02 PM

Sweet complained about not being able to verify? Yet she did? Then she complains that the average reader couldn't? So what's different about that? The average reader has no way to verify any book's veracity, so what, exactly, is she complaining about? Having to do her job?
As for the rehashing of this "story": it died a painful yet well-deserved death once, so just leave it burried, please. It's stinking up the place!

Posted by: Jerry | Jan 16, 2007 5:19:10 PM

Oh Rhonda. Did the National Enquirer turn down your job application again? Perhaps they thought you lacked journalistic integrity. Wherever did they get that idea?

Posted by: Mickey | Jan 16, 2007 5:22:57 PM

Hollywood. Once again Hollywood. Oops excuse me, HOLLYWEIRD!!! This guy's a prime example of how stupid Americans have become. Integrity??? Intelligence???He is all face, all smoke & mirrors, and has yet to show any substance. LOOKS GOOD. WAKE up kiddies...His book uses "composite characters". Yea RIGHT. That used to be called fiction. But hey!, That's what the NY Times does RIGHT? And CBS. Whether he did drugs or not doesn't matter. I am sure he "didn't inhale".

We do not need more Hollywood ____. America is in a real fight for its future, we do not need more PAAARTYing in the oval office. What's it going to take kids? A BIG 911 (aka like a nuke in "24") for you to pull your heads out??? We need leaders of substance, not another fast talking snake oil salesman who gets U.S. citizens massacred by the thousands. But he LOOKS great in a swim suit!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If we are going Hollyweird, at least nominate someone like Tom Cruise. At least he has been in uniform a couple of times & had his butt planted in a war machine.

Posted by: CP | Jan 16, 2007 5:26:08 PM

I'll be interested to see if ABC news puts out a hit-piece on every candidate to announce his or her presidential aspirations. I'd venture to say that ABC won't do a hit piece on Hillary, McCain or anyone else for that matter right out of the gates.

But an African-American announces his intentions, and - presto! - suddenly a hit piece appears the very same day.

Shame on you ABC. I hope you're proud.

Posted by: MichaelD | Jan 16, 2007 5:27:52 PM

Umm....Mark, Dubya also used cocaine, whether he admits it or not.

Posted by: Admin | Jan 16, 2007 5:28:20 PM

To you who said Obama using cocaine is a bad example for our kids. What about our current administration? Bush wouldn't even admit to it and he got 8 years in office running our country into the ground!!! At least Obama has the grace and fortitude to admit his transgressions well ahead of time and learn from them.

As for this article, I think it's a desperate attempt from a news agency to find something wrong with Obama. Grasping at straws is right. Take it off the main page, ABC...

Posted by: Amy | Jan 16, 2007 5:28:31 PM

If this is the worst thing you can say about Obama he should definitely be our leader.

Posted by: Nate | Jan 16, 2007 5:37:29 PM

It appears that Brian Ross has nothing of significance to really investigate...so, let's "investigate" trivialities.

Posted by: sue | Jan 16, 2007 5:39:48 PM

There is more integrity in one keystroke of Obama's little finger than there is in this whole slanted report. Shame on you ABC...and I thought the media was liberal! What a joke, either way. Leave the smearing to Fox News. Peter Jennings would agree.

Posted by: April | Jan 16, 2007 5:40:13 PM

Here we go again. A news organization nit-picking to try to scrounge up some dirt to talk about. Obama is a human being. Anyone that winds up in office without some smattering of dirt on them is the one you´ve got to worry about, and not a guy like Obama. He´s man enough to admit he´s tried coke. What more do you want?

Posted by: George N. | Jan 16, 2007 5:42:04 PM

I am not a fan of Obama. Don't care to read his book. The Blotter indeed. It just sucks up anything.

Posted by: Bob | Jan 16, 2007 5:43:26 PM

Hey CP: Have you actually read either of his books? If you had, you wouldn't be preaching "lack of substance" and "smoke and mirrors".

He might be glitzy and look good in a swimsuit, but he's not just a pretty face. Read more about what he stands for before you fly off like that...

Posted by: Amy | Jan 16, 2007 5:46:44 PM

Uh, ABC 'anti-democrat'!? This story has a headline to grab attention. That's what headlines do. Its exposé actually reads like a puff piece for Obama. It showcases proof that Obama tells the truth about Kaufman/Kellman. It explains at great length the concept of composite characters (in old days they were called fictional characters). The article is designed to 'educate' republicans, yet it riles the dems.

Posted by: marc | Jan 16, 2007 5:50:39 PM

Post a comment