Earlier on Twitter I wrote about how flattering rich people in writing can be very profitable. An example of that is Walter Isaacson's book about Steve Jobs. He convinced Steve to let him be his official biographer. But Isaacson is a technology neophyte. Steve was not. But the book is typical tech bio writing, basically junk, having nothing to do with the way we develop stuff. Yet it should be about that. Because all of Jobs's accomplishments, the things that make him worth writing about at all, were software development projects. But you can't do that if you're Isaacson, and it seems that Jobs should have known that. 

This was one of Jobs's weaknesses. He was into how things looked more than how they are. He was imho a Disneyfier. Nothing wrong with that, but it can bite you in the butt. I'm sure Jobs would have hated the Isaacson book. 

Similarly with the Aaron Sorkin movie that was loosely based on the book. Again, has absolutely nothing to do with anything that made Jobs an interesting character. Now you might say since most people have no idea how technology works, why should anyone care. Well, in the future that might not be true. And Jobs is a historic figure. So anything that purports to be a history should somehow be connected to who the person really was. The future, imho, will need a better book about Jobs than has been written (and I include the Schlender book too).

We need writers who also understand tech, in other words. Not people who write words that flatter rich people. That is if we want to learn and be entertained.