"Looking for the Lie"

“Looking for the Lie” by Robin Marantz Henig was published in The New York Times Magazine, which is a magazine read by many American adults. In general, it addresses current news, relating to any number of topics: entertainment, politics, food, sports, science, crime, technology, business, health, travel, economics, etc. The audience is people who want to keep up-to-date with any kind of national news or developments. However, the New York Time Magazine offers not only information, but it also often incorporates opinion. It has to. People look to the magazine as a source of important and interesting news, and thus, the magazine editors and writers have to rate and determine what qualifies as important and interesting news. It rates music or technology or accomplishments or companies and services. Often the articles are written to present the author’s opinion, as he or she presents the information. The audience of this magazine probably believes in being well informed and having opinions about what is happening. “Looking for the Lie” is an article that informs readers about current developments in the field of “credibility assessment.” However, the author does not conceal her viewpoint about this issue.

This idea of scientifically detecting when someone is lying easily is applicable to the readers’ lives, and that makes this an article that could easily appeal to anyone perusing The New York Times Magazine. First of all, lying is a part of everyone’s everyday life; most of us tell lies, and people lie to us. Before lie detection technology would ever affect us as average citizens in everyday life, it also applies to examining criminals and determining guilt. The author specifically mentions the increase in the importance of “credibility assessment” following the terrorist attacks on 9/11 (page 60). She also ties the subject to invasion of privacy on a personal level for every individual in America. Both terrorism and invasion of privacy are presently intimidating issues for Americans, and the author uses this to her advantage to arouse the concern and fears of the audience. The article easily involves the reader.

Credibility assessment can be a scary concept, and the author’s opinion focuses on this fact. The way the information is presented raises fears, and this article clearly is not designed to rally support for credibility assessment research, which is not portrayed in a very good light or with much enthusiasm for positive results. The author focuses on the failures and shortcomings of the polygraph. She arouses fears that lie detecting would come to impact everyone in everyday life, when I feel that this is a stretch and not applicable to the near future. I don’t think that the present research is hoping to expose lies about “Do you like this sweater?” However, because invasion of privacy is such an important and arousing issue, it is scary that eventually this technology could impact your ability to successfully tell the white lie “That sweater looks great on you.” Henig references “Big Brother” (page 60) and compares credibility assessment research to the Manhattan Project (page 65). She is definitely raising fears in the minds of the readers, and not much is offered to comfort or assuage those fears. This article leaves the reader with much evidence of the possible negative outcomes of pursuing credibility assessment.