F. P. Dorchak

Speculative Fiction (New Weird) Author

Ethics

Hachette v. Amazon

by

Take a Look in the Mirror. In fact Take a Picture, So You'll REMEMBER. By http://www.flickr.com/photos/byflickr/ By Byflickr, Rohan Kar(http://www.flickr.com/photos/byflickr/2584948850/) [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Take a Look in the Mirror. Take a Picture, So You’ll REMEMBER. By http://www.flickr.com/photos/byflickr/ By flickr, Rohan Kar (http://www.flickr.com/photos/byflickr/2584948850/) [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Well, I’m sure this’ll make me extra popular, but I find this annoyance and anger with Amazon amusing.

Really, we’re dumping on Amazon?

Aren’t we also ignoring all the ills of the Traditional Publishing world, with stuff like, oh, yeah: price fixing.

Let me remind you who the “Big Five” were (are), in this little pricing fixing scenario:

Simon & Schuster.

HarperCollins.

Penguin.

Macmillan.

Oh, yeah, and Hachette Book Group.

Hachette.

And, hmmm, let’s see what else does Trad Publishing do that can be taken issue with?

Not helping authors with promotion and marketing.

Less author-friendly contracts (. e.g., sucky terms, grabbing as many of an authors rights as possible, and royalties).

Not including author input on covers.

Making authors feel like we are there only for them, instead of a more teamwork approach.

Not growing authors anymore in favor of a bean counting approach.

Archaic business model.

How they drag their feet in paying authors.

Giving away half your book’s value up front…and the returns, oh. my God, the returns!

In short, there ain’t no saints in this business. This link lays out some other issues. And Bob Mayer’s posts are always elucidating.

All huge companies do what huge companies do, and that is…they do what benefits huge companies. Period. Most times it makes them look “okay,” and they fly under the radar, but periodically, they all do something that gets them in hot water, and they “auger in,” as the flying analogy goes, and crash and burn in the media.

And everyone loves to pick on Amazon. Especially bookstores.

I’m not saying that I agree with what Amazon is doing—I don’t—but to string em up like this is just making for great sound bites and videos. The public has a short memory.

Again, see 2012 price fixing.

 

Related articles

 

 

Going Indie—What I’ve Learned (So Far)—Part 10

by

By HarperTeen [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
Liars, Liars, Pants On Fire! (By HarperTeen [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons)
Over the weekend I got into a short exchange about book blurbs. It was mentioned that during the BEA, that there was a “lot” of talk among editors about how important book blurbs are, now, for debut works to be taken seriously. I watched some of the comments, and saw that not everyone (as readers) seemed enamored over them.

Book blurbs are having some famous person giving a little mini review of your book, like “This is the best piece of literary action/adventure since Shakespeare!” It’s an “If all these people like this book, you will too” marketing approach. I have nothing against that. Personally, blurbs never really played much into my buying a book. As was mentioned by one or two others, it was always about plot, story, title, cover art (yes, I have bought books for the cool looking covers, before…but that’s no longer a factor, since I became a serious writer). That kind of thing.

Then one day, as the “serious writer,” I asked an acquaintance of mine to blurb one of my books.

This person got back to me within an hour or so (to be honest don’t remember the actual response period, but I do remember thinking this person could not have read the book that quickly) with a blurb.

A blurb that was written without having read my work.

I asked if this person had read the book and was, indeed, told no, they hadn’t. I thanked the person, but told them that I would not use it, because I wanted my blurbs to come from people who actually read my work.

Over the years, I had found that this was standard industry practice!

Yes, the traditional publishing industry, that place that brought you your Hunger Games, your Harry Potters, your Dragon Tattoos, even your Chicken Soups, or any of the Oprah-endorsed books…look at all those blurbs famous people wrote. It’s a sure bet most of those were written without the blurber having actually read any of the book in question.

Now, I could be wrong.

It could be that today’s publishing industry has grown morally and ethically since the 15-30 years ago when I discovered this from other authors (yes, I asked some others, and one or two even told me they’d supplied blurbs without having read the books…that it was just “the thing to do…how it was done.”)…buuut, I doubt it. So, I did some quick research over the Internet, and this article is representative of what I found. You might find it interesting, even if it is dated 2012, especially this little line: “Shteyngart admits that he hasn’t fully read all the books he’s blurbed….”

In this (and other articles I found online) nearly all of them all said the same thing: they don’t really sell books. They help get them into bookstores, perhaps, but readers don’t really pay attention to them. Oh, sure, the blurbers might be well meaning, helping out a friend or student…or are sleeping with an editor…or even have a gun to their head, one article joked…but a 2012 Bowker Market Research study showed that only 6% of readers become aware of books through jacket covers or testimonials…blurb effectiveness was anecdotal.

Back to my weekend comment: “So, given the comments, how in touch ARE editors with their readers? Are the blurbs more for official reviews?”

Yes, was the basic response, but when I mentioned that most blurb writers do not read the books they blurb, and make stuff up, the person I interacted with no longer responded. I found that extremely unprofessional on this person’s part. Really, when presented with a “hard” question, you simply…ummm…ignore and run away?

Funny thing, is, I really wasn’t even looking for a fight…was just “organically” responding with the others, and providing my POV, in that I also don’t pay attention to blurbs. So, really, I wasn’t (nor am I currently) looking to embarrass anyone, I was just trying to have a meaningful conversation, in which (I’d hoped) I would be told that, hey, “We, here, in the Publishing Industry no longer hold to misguiding the public with the practice of MAKING UP book review blurbs so you will buy our books. That was then…this is now. But, hey, thank you for bringing up that concern so, we, here, in the Publishing Industry, can address this heinous activity and set the record straight.”

Yeah, well, guess I got my answer.

Yet, we all got all bent out of shape and pissy with the Amazon review scandal of a couple years back, with authors doing their own fake reviews. When you’re making shit up—aka, lying—does it really matter who‘s doing it, if you’re all part of the same bucket?

One may say that they’re not useless, they still get books into bookstores, but getting books into bookstores is not the same as selling them.

Oh, and there’s still the lying part….

As to my own books blurbs, every one of those are from people who read my books (and, in one case, the screenplay I adapted from The Uninvited, which I allowed, because I adapted the screenplay myself and knew it was perfectly inline with the novel). I will also not give any blurbs to books with which I have not read. Yeah, like I’ll be asked, but I’m just sayin’.

Perhaps I’ll even stop my own practice of asking for them, given their shady nature.

So, be wary of any blurb on any book, by anyone. Seems like it’s still a damned good bet that they’re all made up.

 

Related articles

 

Crossing The Line—Lance Armstrong

by

The Short Step That Takes You So Far....
The Short Step That Takes You So Far….

I get it.

I get why he did what he did.

That doesn’t mean I agree with it…I just…understand it.

It is the win-at-all-costs competitive attitude. The razor-sharp focused goal.

Being in the game.

The “level playing field.”

The fact that he didn’t realize how “big” it had all gotten.

When you have a dream, when you’re competitive and have a laser-like focus on something…everything else in life can easily be eclipsed. Ignored. Life can be effortlessly…warped. And when you’re a top athlete…it’s easy to get even more immersed in not only the game…but the concept of the game. The Zen of your single-minded desire. And all your coaches telling you you’re superhuman, unbeatable, the best in the world. Add steroids to the all the trouble, and you create even more of a Bull-in-the-China-shop. Make you more aggressive. Forceful personalities with a goal? Just get out of the goddamned way. You’re either an obstacle to be not just overcome—but decimated—or you’re part of the team. Those are the only two options.

Then throw in some character flaws. Everything above is immediately magnified.

Any analysis of Lance Armstrong and people like him would take far more than a mere blog post (or, is easy, depending on your point of view and whether or not you believe in “black and white” or “shades of gray”), but the Oprah interview of Mr. Armstrong had me riveted. It always fascinates me when criminals get caught and talk about their motivation calmly and oh, so matter-of-factly. Openly. I don’t agree one bit with his actions, but I see them all the time in über-driven people. I’m a driven guy, goal oriented, used to compete in sports. I know the mindset—though I never practiced it to the extreme Lance and others have. I was never willing to screw someone else over to get ahead, and never took any “performance enhancing” drugs, though I had been asked, once, if I wanted to take steroids as I trained for my one and only powerlifting competition during college. They weren’t illegal when I was asked, but I didn’t take them because I wanted to see what I could do on my own. I never blood doped, but I see the allure. Living at over a mile in altitude, every time I go to sea level I was like Superman! I could run forever, squat 415 pounds like it was nothing. Same difference, though the effect wears off once your body acclimatizes to your surrounds. But having the “extra” read blood cells in my body at altitude, then coming down to breath thicker air—oh, yeah, intoxicating how powerful and unstoppable you are.

It’s easy to lose yourself in the game if you don’t keep your head on straight. If you tell yourself you will do anything to win. To win at all costs.

I believe Mr. Armstrong should be penalized, but I also don’t think it should be for life. Yes, he was a bully, was brutal and aggressively attacked all who attacked him—but that’s the Alpha-Male/Female syndrome. Drive forward, decimate opponents, win medals. All else means nothing. Armstrong is no different than many others out there. And I’d argue that any sport instills a similar “culture” of winning on all who participate. Doesn’t make it right, and it needs to be stopped. Sports seem to have evolved into all about winning. Everything else is secondary. Think of one area in particular that arguably seems to have more than its share of honest-to-God criminals in its ranks.

And, maybe, since he was also a philanthropist, it makes everything worse. People question his motives. Here, he was giving so much to organizations that help people, yet behaving as he was “behind the curtain.” Lied, cheated, bullied, and trafficked in drugs. Messed with other people’s lives.

Very few people are perfect. Some crimes more heinous than others. But what seems most important, here, is the growth of the individual, the Lance Armstrong, whether or not any of the rest of us believe him. His atonement for his wrongs. He as to come to terms with himself, he has to fix himself. He says he takes total responsibility and he appeared open and genuine in the interview, even expressed some opinions I’m sure didn’t help him any, but he appears to have finally realized what he’d done, who he’d wronged, and that he has along road ahead of him (pardon the unintended pun). Actions speak louder than words, so we will see if the therapied, humbled, and heavily reworked Lance Armstrong does as his words portrayed. But I don’t think he should be banned for life. Out of his life, came much good with the bad, and if he truly reforms himself, then he should be allowed a second chance. Most people should be allowed a second chance in life.

That…is my humble opinion.