The more I listen to Reitman, the more I am convinced she doesn't get it. Just one example: she repeats cult apologist John Melton's PR-fed assertion that Xenu is a metaphor. Utter bollocks. As per Scientology's Axioms and as per the specific instructions, a Scientologist must "as-is" the Xenu story before being able to commence clearing body thetans. Thinking of the Xenu story as a metaphor means that you have M/Us, Missed Withholds and/or Overts. The entire tech is designed to reduce a person's cognitive functioning down to such a state that they will accept the Xenu story as fact. Most annoyingly, Reitman spouts the false division between the belief system and the organisation. What's missing from that perspective is the simple fact that without the tech the organisation could never have been (and still is) sustained.
Wouldn't surprise me to subsequently learn the book was actually ghost written by Rathbun.
I have still got a lot of listening and reading to do but the little point that Reitman makes that she does not want to call scientology a cult seems stupid to me. AFAIK she claims the term is too loaded. Seems like BS. I get the idea she thinks it may take the shine off the reputation she is establishing as an "objective" writer. IMO a serious writer is not afraid to call a spade a spade. Not to do so is worse than a silly posture.