When I was a reporter at The Virginian-Pilot, I frequently noticed that people are really thin-skinned about anything written about a friend or relative, particularly one who has departed. Of course, this is normal but people seemed inordinately thin-skinned.

I seem to be rare – famous last words – in realizing that a story written about someone is not that person, and can never be. At best, it’s a tiny sliver of the reality of someone.

I was quoted and written about a lot during our unsuccessful Brooklyn Cohousing venture. In general, I was far more accepting of the stories that came out than many of the other members. Here is one among many. The exception or two were those that seemed mean-spirited, but those were rare.

I’m reminded all this in the news in the New York Times this morning that Apple executives are applauding a new biography of Steve Jobs, and coming out about not liking Walter Isaacson’s best seller about Jobs.

I’m tempted to say I’m more sanguine about what is written about myself and friends because of being a journalist. But here’s the thing: I’ve noticed journalists are even thinner skinned than the average civilian, when being written about.

Getting back to the Jobs books: I can understand that the Steve Jobs that Walter Isaacson portrays is not the Steve Jobs that Jonathan Ives or Tim Cook knew. Of course he isn’t. No biographer is going to have the same relationship with Jobs that they did. But it doesn’t mean the Jobs that Isaacson portrayed is invalid.

I really liked Walter’s book, in part for its willingness to dive deeply into design. At the time, that was daring. Who wants to read about minutia of how something is designed, I bet Walter’s editors told him. Design is a bigger deal now, in part because of Jobs, and in part because of Walter’s book about him.

I wonder if the Jobs in Isaacson’s book is portrayed in a harsher light overall than the new book because Jobs gave so many interviews to Walter Isaacson. I bet Jobs was harsher on himself than anyone else.

The new book on Jobs may be perfectly valid as well, and show a side of him that Walter Isaacson didn’t capture as well. Nothing wrong with that.