How to turn facts into rumors

[Peter 13]

In a recent exchange with Dale (who seems to be a very reasonable 
person, and with whom I have no argument) he indicated that he did indeed 
check out the  background (I forget exactly how he put it) of his 
associate - I wonder if he considered the following scenario:

1) I used to work for the Library of Congress in the Rare Book 
Division - This is a fact which can be verified any number of ways including a 
check of The Library of Congress Information Bulletin

2) The Rare Book Division is where
you would find what you'd think of as rare books but it also holds the 
library's collection on how to build bombs,  and also pornography - 
This fact can be checked via a review of the library's online catalog

3) A lot of famous and important authors use the rare book collection 
at LC - This fact can be verified through the Washington Post, the 
newsletter previously cited, and the acknowledgements of hundreds of books

Now if I wanted to write a memoir of my days at LC I could add a 
juicey morsel merely by mixing the facts presented above - I could suggest 
that I know that Author x is interested in child pornography because I saw 
her request these materials - What could Author x's
protection be?  All the facts can be
verified

This becomes twice as important when the author in question is a 
recluse - I would suggest that any memoir published for profit must have all 
claims verified by the most
rigorous research

Here's an example of a similar problem although on the surface the 
opposite of TRP's - Humphrey Bogart was not a recluse - In fact, the 
problem is too much information churned out by a Hollywood studio more 
interested in image than facts (rumors for profit?) - In an excellent new book 
BOGART by A.M. Sperber and Eric Lax no claim about the actor's childhood 
or career is presented without suitable citation to facts - It would be 
easy to try to generate a book of scandels (like the book about Cary 
Grant by Charles Higham or any of the "biographies" by Kitty Kelly) these 
books may sell more but they are less valuable 

I would suggest that any book about TRP should be rejected unless it 
is backed up with rigorous facts

Regarding the Puzo matter: it has been suggested by somebody fairly 
close to the matter that perhaps when two writers get together and talk 
one writer naturally assumes that he somehow influenced the other - In 
other word's Mario never slapped a hand on his desk and said "By Jove,
I'm gonna incorporate those qualities in my new character" The other 
writer just assumed he did - But isn't that my point?  If somebody is 
willing to make such assumptions don't all that person's  assumptions need 
to be reviewed?

Some people have asked why I keep pursuing this - I consider it all 
and interesting academic question but there's something else:

Jules, in a public message on this list, told me (and I'm paraphasing) 
that the way to learn is to put out ideas and see what the reaction is 
-
Since he is a successful journalist I thought that this is good advice 
so I'm following it - So far I've gotten a bunch of flames, a bunch of 
kind remarks and a lot of help with leads for my research - About par 
for the course

I am going to follow Dale's advice and wait for a cumulative pile of 
research before I post on this topic again -- However, I'd be glad to 
discuss any and all of the above on list or off

Thanks

Peter