Upon reflection, author Gay Talese says he’s disavowing his earlier disavowal of his own work.

The acclaimed journalist on Friday backtracked on comments he made Thursday after confronted with missing information and mistakes in his forthcoming book, “The Voyeur’s Motel.” Talese initially called the subject of his book, Gerald Foos, “certifiably unreliable” and “dishonorable,” and said he would not promote the book when it is released July 12. “How dare I promote it when its credibility is down the toilet?” he said in an interview with The Washington Post.

The book is about Foos’s career as a serial voyeur; for years, he spied on guests of his Aurora, Colo., motel from an attic catwalk. However, property records unearthed by The Washington Post showed that Foos didn’t own the motel for eight years in the 1980s, calling into question some of Talese’s reporting.

On Friday, Talese had a change of heart about distancing himself from the book.

In a statement from his publisher, Grove/Atlantic, the 84-year-old author said, “Gerald Foos, as no one calls into question, was an epic voyeur, and, as I say very clearly in the text, he could also at times be an unreliable teller of his own peculiar story. When I spoke to the Washington Post reporter, I am sure I was surprised and upset about this business of the later ownership of the motel, in the [1980s]. That occurred after the bulk of the events covered in my book, but I was upset and probably said some things I didn’t, and don’t, mean. Let me be clear: I am not disavowing the book and neither is my publisher. If, down the line, there are details to correct in later editions, we’ll do that.”

In a series of interviews on Wednesday and Thursday, Talese was initially dismissive when confronted with lapses in his reporting. He said he was surprised to learn that Foos had initiated a series of sales of the motel starting in 1980.

“I don’t really know what happened in 1981 or 1982 or 1985 because I wasn’t interested in it,” he said. He added that questions about this period weren’t important “to the story I wanted to tell,” which was about a serial voyeur and “the changing tone and texture of America” as seen through his surreptitious observations.

But after speaking with Foos, Talese’s tone began to change.

He said he told Foos: “I didn’t know you sold the motel in 1980. You should have told me.” And he said Foos replied: “Well, I didn’t think it was important.”

Asked in the interview whether the various sales of the Manor House Motel mattered to him, Talese replied, “Yes, it does matter to me. I’ve never had a situation where I was lied to or duped before. I’ve had problems with books I’ve written before. But I do try to never make mistakes or be used by people . . . . I’m so stupid that I let the voyeur lie to me.”

Talese visited the motel in 1980 and spied on guests from the attic’s observation walkway after Foos invited him to do so. But he had no direct contact with Foos thereafter until 2013, when Foos waived a confidentiality agreement Talese had signed in 1980. At that point, Talese decided to write about Foos, basing much of his account on the voluminous journals Foos kept of his voyeurism.

As the Post interviews continued earlier this week, Talese’s mood became more despairing.

“So here we are,” he said at one point. “The main character [in my book] is a super liar. That’s going to kill the book.” He variously called Foos “a faker,” “a liar,” “a creep” and “close to a fraud.”

“I’m not going to promote this book,” he eventually declared. “How dare I promote it when its credibility is down the toilet?”

A day later, he changed his mind.

Talese could not be reached via phone or email on Friday.

Grove/Atlantic says it will publish the book as planned but will add an author’s note or footnotes in later editions to explain what the book leaves out and to address several errors noted in the text.

In a statement on Friday, the publisher’s chief executive, Morgan Entrekin, said, “Grove takes the Post story seriously and will work with Talese to address any questions in future printings.”