It's curious to you that people seek to make money :?: In context, yes. When said people are journalists and choose not to publish their findings in the general news media, rather they choose to reveal their findings in a private publication. So I question their motives, which then leads to questioning the validity of the research. The repurcussions for inaccurate statements in a private publication are not nearly the same as if published in a reputable news publication. From what I've read about the authors, they are some of the best investigative journalists around. The fact that they chose a book rather than some other form of media to present their findings should be irrelevant. I'm sure they spent much time and resources to discover this information. I have no problem with them choosing the media form that could reimburse them with the most profits. I don't think it impacts their credibility at all. I do understand Dude's point though. But I think in this particular case, because the book is being touted (rightly or wrongly) as "finally the proof Bonds did it," if the facts in the book were proven to be wrong or poorly investigated the repurcussions would probably be pretty bad.