SPURIOUS: not genuine, authentic, or true...counterfeit. (Dictionary.com)

-------

Spurious is a great word. I use it too frequently, almost as an evil toy, knowing that a lot of people don't know the meaning of it. It is an ego-driven, prideful action my part. But I love it, and I love being able to explain the meaning of the word.

Usually spurious is used in the world of literature or publishing to identify a questionable source. There have been numerous examples recently of journalists who write about an event without having been present. They pretend to have been there, all the time drawing their descriptions and material from someone else's report. It is then said that in some peoples' minds "the sources are spurious." This has the effect of diminishing the authenticity of the article and calling its effectiveness into question.

Thus, the word spurious is not to be used casually (an act to which I confessed above). In the world of publishing it has the capability of destroying a person's credibility and undermining that person's career.

Spurious is a good word for a reviewer to use as it is strong and filled with literary energy, but it is not a word that grovels in emotion. It signals to the reader that information is being questioned, but without personal animus. It locates the criticism within the literary profession, calling for a response which is measured. The journalist or author can choose to respond in a similar manner, or become defensive, moving the question to another level.

When used politically, however, the term spurious becomes a weapon which is debilitating. On the campaign trail, where things move at such a rapid pace, an accusation of spurious information can find itself published instantaneously over Cable TV, talk radio,Twitter, Facebook, and other personal media tools, reaching the ears and eyes of hundreds of thousands of people before a measured, reasonable response can be crafted. It is a devastating accusation and can prove to be a game-changer.

Yesterday's pre-release reviews of former Governor Sarah Palin's new book, Going Rogue carried with it some questions of
spurious information. One commentator, for instance, suggested that her listing of books she has read (in response to her angry reflection on the famous Katie Couric interview question) was spurious, resembling a High School reading list. I have no idea whether the commentator is accurate or not, but in simply raising the thought that the list has spurious qualities plants a seed in the reader's mind about authenticity.

Words can be powerful weapons, and, as such, should be used with caution. This is a charge to myself as well as others. Mea culpa.

Photo Credit: Stockphoto.com