I couldn't do it. The facts weren't there, nor was I willing any longer to use innuendo and unverified charges to spice up my material, which I had done in the past . After the book was published, I found myself picking up the pieces of a broken career as a right-wing muckraker, but I was proud of my book even though it had trouble in the marketplace. All authors of big nonfiction books face the arduous task of generating headlines to spur book sales. Too often, authors succumb to market pressures by trafficking in rumor, using unreliable sources or embellishing their material, all in the service of hype and buzz.
Publishing houses are notoriously lax about fact-checking.
Most authors caught short, and I speak from experience, are able to bluster their way through the controversies incited by their shaky work. Sad to say, the controversies themselves are good for business. In writing about the Clintons, the phenomenon is magnified greatly. For one thing, it's incredibly hard to unearth new revelations about the first couple after a decade of examination by zealous prosecutors, Republican-led Congressional committees and a feverish press corps. Serious, respected authors do try to present new material.