[barretts]

You are 100% wrong. Stone interviewed Bezos many times over the years, just not expressly for this book. (Bezos refused.) Bezos did give permission for many of his friends and colleagues to speak to Stone, so he did cooperate in a fashion.

Reporting on a subject without interviewing them is so common, and so necessary, that journalists have a term to describe it. It's called a "write-around."

Full disclosure: I worked with Brad Stone for two years.

[OvidNaso]

But Mrs. Bezos mentions his use of all those thinking verbs he ascribes to Jeff. I was reminded yesterday of writing advice by Chuck Paluchink (thanks Reddit) to never use these "thought" verbs and instead to show. This is even more important for non-fiction.

Presumably Mr. Stone had evidence and reason to put Bezos's mind in a certain frame from circumstance, action, or interviews and if he did, he should have laid out that evidence to show us his probably mental state and not simply told us.

[barretts]

I totally agree that "thought" verbs are tricky, and different news organizations have different rules regarding them. But I wanted to correct the notion that it is "unprofessional" to profile someone without interviewing that person. Gay Talese and Esquire would certainly agree with me, as would decades of journalistic norms.

http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ1003-OCT_SINATRA_rev_

[kineticfocus]

I haven't read the book... and I can't possibly be an arbitrar on whose perspective is more accurate. But in my opinion, Bezos' personally worded perspective wouldn't have hurt. I'm happy to hear friends and colleagues were interviewed.