I think the point is that he lied to the public by calling his book fact. If this had been rated as fiction that would have been okay by me. Even if the book had been touted as "based on a true story" the way they do with some films that would have been fine too.
But hyping it as the truth when it wasn't was wrong.
To me this book now being revealed as being untrue is a disservice to people who did come through addiction problems and are honest about it even if they did or did not write a book about their recovery. My mother-in law-was a counsellor at a drug/alcohol hehab centre and dealt with these issues all the time and was herself a former alcoholic. Maybe that is why this whole thing bothers me so much.
Not only that, if you look at it this way, if you were told something was one thing, paid the money for it and then discovered it was not what you were sold you would feel rippped off wouldn't you? If this work had been marketed as a work of fiction or as being based on actual events then you wouldn't feel like he ripped readers off, or was a liar and a phoney.
But then that seems to be the way society is heading with things like tabloids where they even make up fake stories just to sell papers, reality shows like Survivor, Big Brother etc. and Simple Life that seem to say it's okay to lie, steal, cheat or be rude and mean to others to get ahead and all of these are eaten up by the public.
I'll get off my box now