Sure, I understand the difference. I honestly can't speak for how an LDS person would view the book. I think Krakauer does a pretty good job of remaining neutral in most of his work, but I thought his presentation of the history of Mormonism had an unfavorable slant. But again, I really shouldn't try to speak for an LDS person; I was just speculating. No offense intended. Have you read it, and if so, do you think Krakauer was guilty of editorializing at all? (Sorry to go off topic)
I haven't read it but I have heard about it. From what I have heard he does a good job of telling the story but that he does have a slightly slanted/biased position against the LDS church. In my experience that is pretty much par for the course. Very few books about the LDS church, or and church for that matter, have a "favorable" slant, unless they are written by members (and then the slant is usually much more than favorable! lol). We all have our passions and beliefs and it is very difficult to keep them from showing up in things like books. That is not to say it is a bad thing, as long as we admit/own up to our biases and, if at all possible, limit their pervasiveness and influence on our work.
BTW, no offense was taken even before you said that none was intended.