In the reading, critics suspects that some contents in the memoir of the Chevalier de Seingalt are inaccurate, while the professor in the listening passage argues that these parts are convincingly reliable, and she uses specific evidence to support her opinion.

In the reading, critics suspects that some contents in the memoir of the Chevalier de Seingalt are inaccurate, while the professor in the listening passage argues that these parts are convincingly reliable, and she uses specific evidence to support her opinion. Firstly, according to the Chevalier's book, he was rich when he was living in Switzerland, but the reading article suggests that he used to borrow loads of money from a Swiss businessman. However, in the lecture, the professor explains that the action of borrowing money does not mean actually he was monetary shortage. Since he often went to parties and gambling, he needed plenty of cash, and he would be waiting for the cash fluent and using the borrowed money to make up the usage of parties and gambling. Moreover, in the reading passage, critics said the Chevalier could not be possible to remember the exact words in the conversations between the popular writer Voltaire and himself, because the memoir was put down years after the conversations. Whereas the presenter indicates that the Chevalier has a habit of recording the chatting he has every night as much as possible, and there are also evidence about the reference of notes and journals. Finally, critics could not believe that he escaped from the prison in Venice through the hole of the ceiling which he made by using a piece of metal, and they believe that he could be freed by one of his friends who worked in the government. Nevertheless, many prisoners in the same prison had connect with politicians, but they could not manage to be freed. Besides, government announced that the ceiling of the cell of the Chevalier had to be repaired, which could be a strong evidence that this part of his memoir is not just a made-up story.