The Old Neverending PublishAmerica Thread (Publish America)

Re: Keep the masses in the dark

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I also wonder how long it will be before they yank the Author's Market site down.<hr></blockquote>
Victoria, why would they yank that site down? Even though I haven't really gone through it, it appears to be an innocuous little site that simply re-tells the same story with a pretty background. Am I missing something?

Geez, with five titles going to print, why do I even ask myself these silly questions??<img border=0 src="http://www.absolutewrite.com/images/EmoteHeadbang.gif" />

legitimate publishing

I have seen a lot of helpful information on these background check boards detailing the difference between what legitimate agents and publishers and the scam agents and publishers do.

However I have noticed one thing that appears to have been overlooked. This is in fact the most common thing that legit agents and publishers do. And that thing is that they reject you. Most writers will be rejected over and over again before they find an agent who wants to represent them. And even once they are signed with an agent, they will almost definitely experience further rejection by publishers, until they find one that wants to publish them. And that is the storyline for the minority who actually find an agent and/or get published. Most will never do either. There are far more manuscripts being written out there than will ever be published. Most won't be, because they aren't good enough.

And before the accusations start flying, let me state for the record that I am not a bitter, repeatedly rejected novelist. I've never had my novel rejected, because I have not submitted it anywhere yet. I'm still working on my first novel and am currently researching agents, which is what originally led me to these boards. Though, I have had both successes and failures in other venues with my writing and have no delusions of what lies ahead.

Pursuing a writing career is not for the thin skinned or the faint of heart. It requires tenacity and resillience, and if you are not willing to deal with repeated rejection, then perhaps vanity publishing is the way to go.

I think it is very important that as you warn writers of the scams, you also prepare them for the reality of legitimate publishing. You are doing them no favors telling them what they should look for, without giving them any perspective on the odds of them ever finding it.

legitimate publishing

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>This is in fact the most common thing that legit agents and publishers do. And that thing is that they reject you.<hr></blockquote>
Well, yes, Simon, we do reject. Often. I can only speak for my own company, but our standards are extremely high. Manuscripts have usually been edited professionally before they're even submitted to us. Those that haven't been and require a lot of work get rejected. Same thing if it needs developmental work.

In our rejection notices, we go far beyond a form letter. Each author receives a full out critique of why I rejected their manuscript. As an author myself, I understand the appreciation of knowing why I didn't fit the bill.

It's a painful process for both publisher (at least it is in my case) and the author, and it's the worst part of my job. However, I must say that we've had two authors who took my advice to heart and went to work. Their titles will be coming out in pre-release soon.

So keep up the writing and keep faith that someone will read your work, and it will touch them. I was an oft-rejected author and I know how lousy it feels to have the form letters lining the walls of my bathroom.

The publisher that eventually accepted me was less than stellar, making reviews and signings hard to come by. I was fortunate to have someone on the inside of a major paper review my book. First thing they told me to do is find another publisher. Second thing they told me was that my novel belonged on the N.Y. Times Bestseller. So, don't ever lose faith. Dreams do come true.

Best of luck,

Re: Keep the masses in the dark

The purpose of Background Check is put out feelers about prospective agents and publishers and to warn about those who seem less than legit.

The travails of the writing life are covered in detail in many other sections of the Water Cooler including (but not limited to) Rejection and Dejection - Freelance Writing - Take It Outside and even the Newbies section.

legitimate publishing

AKA

It has been expressed by many on this board, that it is just too darn difficult for many to find the information that they need about publishing either in cyberspace or elsewhere. This would include statistics etc., about rejection and what is really involved in finding an agent.

If by the grace of God someone has been fortunate enough to find the Background Check board BEFORE getting sucked in by a scammer, and they read these posts, it might be helpful to them if a little care is taken to impart a total picture of legit publishing. If you tell someone to expect a legit agent to take 10 or 15% of your writing income and not charge reading fees, you should also point out they should expect most legit agents to reject their work. That is an important fact as well. And something all writers need to be prepared for.

If you assume that people will do more research elsewhere, I would agree with you. But that is obviously not the case. And furthermore, many of the knowledgable posters on this board, know this is not the case and they do not expect people to do more research or even encourage them to do so. They obviously want to help the ones who do not share their knowledge. So while you got their attention, why not give them a little extra info?

There are many who want to be in print, but do not want to venture down a long, hard rejection filled road to get there. For many of those people, vanity publishing or POD might be the way to go. For many vanity or POD may be the only option.

You can't have it both ways, you can't say it's too hard to find the information and then not bother to give the information when you have the chance. That would be... what's the word?....... irresponsible.

Re: Keep the masses in the dark

>>Victoria, why would they yank that site down? Even though I haven't really gone through it, it appears to be an innocuous little site that simply re-tells the same story with a pretty background. Am I missing something?<<

Lynn, check this part of it: www.authorsmarket.net/youreyes.htm. It's a tirade against "author advocates" specifically aimed at Ann, Dave, and me. And incidentally dissing a good proportion of PA's writers. PA publishes a lot of sf/fantasy.

>>If you tell someone to expect a legit agent to take 10 or 15% of your writing income and not charge reading fees, you should also point out they should expect most legit agents to reject their work.<<

Simon, from my observation, this is one of the few pieces of true publishing lore that most aspiring writers do know. And many have been rejected, over and over--which is what gives the scam acceptance letter such magical power. It's often the first validation of their work they've ever received.

90% of a good con is psychology.

- Victoria

Re: legitimate publishing

SimonSays:

If someone has found the Background Check board then that someone has found the Water Cooler.

Background Check is one of 32 open forums on the Cooler, each with a theme, some inter-related. If I'm understanding your complaint correctly you seem to think that this particular board and its posters should provide a crash course in publishing with a special emphasis on the difficulties of landing an agent or publisher.

I've been posting on the Cooler in various forums since the day it started. While I'm not about to wade through all the accumulated threads on BC I'd venture to say that point has been addressed more than once.

And, as I mentioned in my previous post; the difficulties of the writer's lot including the difficulty of getting published has been covered many, many times on many, many forums. I don't think it's a stretch to say it pops up in one thread or another every day.

The viability, indeed, even the benefits of vanity or POD publishing for some has also been addressed on more than one Cooler forum.

Yes there's an emphasis on being published by a traditional publisher. I believe the vast majority of people who join the AW community have that as their goal. I also believe that any who come here thinking that goal is easy to attain soon disabuse themselves of the notion.

I think it's a tad disingenuous to suggest that "while you got their attention, why not give them a little extra info?"

That info is all over the Cooler for them as wants it.

Re: Keep the masses in the dark

And it might be pointed out that some of us specialize. Some folks in the industry specialize in publishing books. Others print magazines. Others are agents. It goes on and on like that. And many are writers.

However, some of us work to prevent frauds. We're aware that rejection is going to occur to good writers and bad. However, preparing them for rejection is not our area of expertise. We leave that to others who are more knowledgeable about formats and submissions, even though P&E does contain some common sense about such matters. So does Writer Beware. So do other watchdog sites. Providing such extras helps writers find us when they need what we have to give them.

I don't know about the other watchdog sites, but I once tallied the amounts about six years ago that writers wrote to tell me P&E had saved them before I had to stop saving those particular emails because of hard drive space limitations. That was when P&E was only in operation for two years. We'd helped writers save almost a half-million dollars in steering them away from the upfront fee chargers. On top of that, several wrote to exclaim excitedly that they'd found a good agent using our listings and had sold their books. The total they'd earned was over a hundred thousand dollars.

Interestingly enough, P&E doesn't receive as many complaints now as it used to. That's partly because we know most of the main players now. Instead, many of the emails are thanks for having the information they need. We don't embarrass those who gave us information and they've spread the word about us and others such as Writers Beware and Absolute Write. We don't put them down. We don't steal their dignity. They've rewarded us by providing much needed information about what they've encountered and in some cases by getting published with reputable outlets.

disingenuous

i think it's a bit disingenuous, not to mention hypocritical to take the positions that both the info is elsewhere if people want it AND it's not people's fault if they don't look elsewhere to find it and then get scammed.

I don't know if you were involved in the discussion above, but that was the position of many posters on this board - that the information is too hard to find, so people who get sucked in are not responsible for not finding it or not even bothering to look for it.

As I said you can't have it both ways. And since my suggestion merely involves typing a few extra words when you point out the differences between legit and scam, it really does not seem like too much to ask.

Re: legitimate publishing

"i think it's a bit disingenuous, not to mention hypocritical to take the positions that both the info is elsewhere if people want it AND it's not people's fault if they don't look elsewhere to find it and then get scammed."

Being naive or underinformed can get people in many kinds of trouble. In that sense, a scammee has some responsibility. I don't think that that excuses a scammer, though. The scammer is guilty of deliberate manipulation; the scammee only believed the scammer's lies.

Re: legitimate publishing

Part of the point that at least I have been making is that many people in the US were not taught how to properly conduct research. In fact, it doesn't occur to most people to add the word scam to their other search words. That it occurred to you only points out that you are one of the few who appears to know how to conduct a search.

However, having said that, there is also this to be considered. Add too many words to a search using many of the Internet search engines will result in a deluge of matches, many of which will not even be at all near to what's wanted. Furthermore, a number of those will statistically poll higher than what is wanted, so what's wanted will frequently be buried beneath numerous pages of unwanted material.

With that point in mind, remember that we are discussing a common denominator in skills and that precludes accusing everyone of ignorance simply because they don't rank at the top in search skills. I learned over the years that people who are different are not necessarily stupid. It just means they're specialized in other areas where many of the rest of us would appear just as stupid and unknowledgeable about where to research the facts we would need for those pursuits.

It's also a fact that most people accept the first sources they find because they don't know enough about what they're researching to know that there is more out there than meets the eye. If they knew that, they wouldn't be victimized. However, everyone goes through the learning curve and it's while they're in that curve that they're most vulnerable. They're still learning the hows and whys of the industry. It's a given that they didn't do enough research because they don't know enough to do proper research. That's why they're targeted by scammers. Making them admit to that is not beneficial to anyone. Well, except for those who feed on the insecurities of others and need to feel like they're superior.

disingenuous

Actually Dave, you got the wrong idea from the beginning about me.

From the posts I had read on the few pages before, besides for Dee (and I have nothing against Dee, who is obviously taking personal responsiblity for trying to get herself OUT of the contract as opposed to just whining about it - you go girl!) I got the feeling that most of the posters were not scam victims, they were advocates like you and those who were informed enough to avoid the scams. I did not think I was speaking to an audience of PA authors.

I was not picking on anybody, I was making a GENERAL OBSERVATION about doing research. And since I am not a rocket scientist and my research has brought me so much valuable information in a relatively short period of time time, it appeared to me that it was not all that difficult to do.

I was not trying to make anyone feel bad. I was not as you so rudely put it "feeding on the insecurities of others" because I "need to feel superior" I was not attacking anyone - I was merely pointing out, that there are ways to do your best to avoid things like this and the best way to do it is through educating yourself. And also suggesting that people make an effort to educate themselves so they greatly reduce the risk of getting scammed in the future.

It's more of life philosphy than anything else, that we have a responsiblity to take care and protect ourselves to the best of our ability. I did not think it was an outrageous or mean-spirited concept. And to be honest, I was shocked that my and Nameless' statements were met with such a resounding and loud group "raspberry". And quite frustrated to see how few people embrace that concept, because it scares me that we live in a world where so few people are willing to take responsiblity for their decisions and this particular dialogue was a microcosm of a much bigger picture for me. In fact this conversation, for me at least was never really about PA.

As for the rest. I don't think you have any idea how devestating it can be for people to go through rejection after rejection after rejection if they are not mentally prepared for it. Hell, it's tough even when you are prepared. But if you are not prepared it can be just as hard on the psyche as falling for a scammer.

But it is clear to me now that this particular message board is about bashing the scammer and nothing else. So I will just hope that those who need more information about publishing will do their own research and let you all get back to the bashing.

Re: legitimate publishing

Your observation is well taken, but this is the wrong place to state that others should take responsibility for what they don't know. Teach them how in another board within this overall forum, if you want. This board is for telling them and others what's out there to be wary of.

You've been jumped on because you advocated an argument that's been used before by trolls trying to advance their own scam business interests. They and flim flam artists always try to shift the blame onto others rather than admit their guilt in using deception. Why? Because this forum and a few others are having success at cutting into the number of victims they create.

We protect minors from getting in over their heads with laws because it's a commonly known fact that the majority of children are unprepared to deal with contracts and such because they're still learning. Unfortunately, we don't offer the same protections to those who enter a new field of endeavor and are learning once more.

So yes, if you think writers should take more responsibility, then help teach them how. I think that would be equally important to giving out warnings. You might even put us out of business... and I won't mind at all.

re: snap judgements

Making snap judgements that someone is a troll or scammer because they express views that differ from yours is really quite sad.

I actually do have quite a bit of insight and knowledge from both my research into publishing and my working experience as a screenwriter.

However some of the regulars on this board have made me feel so unwelcome at this site for my opposing views and my non-coddling style, I really don't know if I want to be bothered.

Re: re: snap judgements

Non-coddling? Yeah, right. You're a sockpuppet apologist for scammers. Don't let the blank hit you in the blank on your way blank.

From the previously uninformed

The important thing to remember is who the villian is in this piece. Yes, we all need to learn to watch out for ourselves out there, but most of us thought we were! I checked with other authors about PA - and questioned PA directly about their traditional/POD status. Now I know that I should have done more - should have searched the 'net for info - but I thought I was making a good decision. PA wasn't asking for money. Supposedly, that was one of the warning signs.

As far as others who took the bait: there are some writers who barely use the Internet - or just weren't aware that we needed to be careful! When I started out, I thought all publishers and agents were on the level! It never occurred to me that the world was full of literary wolves.

Being scammed is something that happens TO YOU. Making the victims feel guilty is wrong. Helping them to become informed is the right step to take. That is why I have so much respect for people like Dave, Victoria Strauss, and Ann Crispin. Their answer is to TRY to keep it from happening - but if someone does fall into a trap, they pull them out and try to keep them from falling in again.

A much better response, I think.

Nancy Mehl

Re: re: snap judgements

<<<sockpuppet apologist for scammers>>>

Another Hapisofi-ism to add to the old lexicon. :lol

Re: re: snap judgements

Making snap judgments? Not hardly. You fly in quacking like a duck in duck season, well, you ought to be wise enough to figure out the rest.

You chose an argument used over and over again before by trolls doing the bidding of scammers. After all, they're not scammers if their trolls can convince others that the victims are more at fault. Why else do you think they have a section in their contract disavowing their advertising? They have to because their advertising is patently false and they know it. The victims think they're acknowledging that they weren't influenced by all the notices of success by other writers.

When it comes to scammers and anyone espousing their arguments, we don't roll over and play dead. We don't turn the other cheek. And we don't take prisoners. There is no compromise. Either the scammers change their business practices to those that are legitimate or they change industries. Otherwise, we'll eventually nail them.

And you think I'm being mean to you? Well, consider this. I can either be mean to you or mean to thousands of other writers. Guess which side of the scales you're on.

Author's market

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Lynn, check this part of it: www.authorsmarket.net/youreyes.htm. It's a tirade against "author advocates" specifically aimed at Ann, Dave, and me. And incidentally dissing a good proportion of PA's writers. PA publishes a lot of sf/fantasy.<hr></blockquote>

LOL. Victoria, it's gone. Poof. Where are they doing their tirade against you? This is a PA site, right? Does that mean that the same powers that be actually maintain this site as well? I'm not really sure why I give a rat's patoot about all this as I'm far too busy, but I suppose it's good to be informed.

Re: re: snap judgements

www.authorsmarket.net/youreyes.htm

it's still there, just don't include that period at the end.

Author's market

Ah, okay, now I understand what you're talking about, Victoria. Wow. Interesting information packed on this sour little page - <a href="http://www.authorsmarket.net/youreyes.htm" target="_new">http://www.authorsmarket.net/youreyes.htm</a>

The only thing missing are names, right? If I had read this site as an author in search of a publisher, this would have had me running in the opposite direction.

This is filled with an amateurish diatribe that sounds as if someone snapped their bras in gym class. They would be far better served if they simply took this entire page out. Any company that spends an inordinate amount of time defending themselves by smearing their detractors gives the impression that perhaps there is a grain of truth to those detractor’s claims. Bad tactics in my opinion.

Having been a recent target for their smear tactics in a public forum, all I can do is shake my head and pity their fears. It rules their lives. Hardly a benchmark for success.

quack!

I had no idea what arguments the scammers use, because ironically, my research led me on a path that avoided things like clicking on an ad for any agent or publisher seeking writers. And knowing that the types of publishers that I am looking for, require submission by an agent. I believe that particular area of my research took maybe 15 seconds. Okay I'm exaggerating maybe closer to 3 minutes. So I never even looked at the PA's of the world.

This board is 44 pages. 44 pages of warnings and whining (mostly whining). If someone has not gotten the message about PA after the first 4 pages, let alone the first 4 posts, well...... what can i say? And this is obviously not the only board on this site that deals with PA as the Board Administrators are attempting to limit the number of threads, so there very well may be 100s if not 1,000s of pages of warnings and whining.

This has far less to do with warning others than it is a self-indulgent pity-party. And it is sad to see that after all this time there has been no real effort to ORGANIZE and actually DO something about the problem.

So in an effort to save any potential PA'er from making a huge mistake not to mention sparing them from subjecting themeselves to another 44 pages of whining let me just say:

PA IS NOT A TRADTIONAL PUBLISHER EVEN THOUGH THEY CLAIM THEY ARE. IF YOU WANT A TRADITIONAL PUBLISHER AND YOU WANT YOUR BOOK IN BOOKSTORES GET YOURSELF AN AGENT (ONE WHO DOES NOT CHARGE FEES AND IS AN AAR MEMBER). MANY PUBLISHERS ONLY ACCEPT MANUSCRIPTS THAT ARE SUBMITTED BY AGENTS

CHECK THE WEB OR THE BOOKSTORES FOR INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THE PUBLISHING INDUSTRY WORKS. IF YOUR LOCAL BOOKSTORE DOES NOT CARRY THEM, CHECK AMAZON.COM. YOU MAY HAVE TO PAY 20 OR 30 BUCKS TO BUY THE BOOK, BUT IT IS A WORTHWHILE INVESTMENT AND IT WILL HELP YOU AVOID OTHER SCAMS IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE YOU WILL KNOW WHAT TO LOOK FOR AND WHAT QUESTIONS TO ASK.

CHOOSE AGENTS WHO HAVE SOLD BOOKS IN THE SAME GENRE AS YOURS - MOST LEGITIMATE AGENTS THAT HAVE WEBSITES LIST THEIR CLIENTS & THEIR RECENT SALES. AVOID AGENTS WITH NO VERIFIABLE SALES.

CHECK PREDITORS & EDITORS AND WRITERS BEWARE TO SEE IF THE AGENT IS LEGIT.

DO A SEARCH ON GOOGLE FOR TIPS ON HOW TO WRITE A QUERY LETTER, BECAUSE IF YOUR QUERY LETTER IS NOT GOOD, YOU WILL NOT GET YOUR MANUSCRIPT READ.

PREPARE FOR A LOT OF REJECTION ALONG THE WAY.

IF YOU DO NOT DO ANY OF THE ABOVE, AND END UP SIGNING WITH A SCAM AGENT OR PUBLISHER, THEN IT IS PARTLY YOUR FAULT BECAUSE YOU DID NOT TAKE THE TIME TO EDUCATE YOURSELF.

GOOD LUCK.

*If you are looking to get published, and you read this post, you should now know that you should stay away from Publish America, have a little information about what you need to do and know what you should do to learn more about publishing. You do not have to read the next 44 pages, unless of course you enjoy reading post after post of people whining.

All the best on your road to publication,

Simon

Re: quack

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>This has far less to do with warning others than it is a self-indulgent pity-party.<hr></blockquote>

Simon, I believe I have to take issue with your remark. It's insensitive and crude. As an author, I know what it's like to pour years of hard research and writing into a novel.

I am extremely grateful for the experiences I had with my publisher because it made me a much better person and business woman. That doesn't mean I'm not taking prudent steps to gain my rights back, because my novel deserves better.

However, I well understand the pain and agony many have experienced by being associated with certain publishers. To blithely accuse people of having a pity party diminishes any goodwill one might attempt to have for you.

Yes, there are 44 pages filled with pain and suffering and well-intentioned information. This forum isn't strictly to get the word out about the newest and greatest scams that are populating the publishing industry, but is also a therapeutic outlet with others who understand. Some people need to hang on to their anger for various reasons, and it isn't up to any of us to define what is whining or a curative vent. You are telling people it's time to move on and quit crying, and I'd like to know just who appointed you the Keeper of Emotions.

If you don't like what you're reading here, go elsewhere. But to insist that everyone base their emotional strengths according to SimonSays is arrogant and rude. Emotions are like belly buttons; everybody has one and a little respect goes a long, long way.

Re: Author's market

actually, page ONE of this thread is dated 11/19/03; November 19, 2003.

so in seven months you have 44 pages - considering that most of these are discussions going back and forth between posters debating the merits of PA (yes, they do have their defenders who come in and attempt to justify their decisions) that's still under seven pages a month - and with some posts taking up almost a page itself, not exactly a good example of a lengthy thread on a "pity party".

the length of the post itself is also due to the "restriction" put on that ALL PA discussions be limited to a single thread, to avoid having a slew of different threads bleeding all over the different boards about PublishAmerica; so that also has added to the length and longevity of the thread as well. There's been posts discussing contract negotiations; bad editing and a variety of conversations about pricing and selling of PA books - hardly the example you think it is.

Re: quack!

Priceless - this board is the background check board - where people come to see if an agent or publisher they are considering is or is not reputable. Most of the threads on the Background Check Board do exactly that.

It has been suggested that the information I have posted about the publishing world belongs elsewhere. I contend that the commiserating and venting belongs on a "support" or "rant" board NOT a background check board. I don't think it's fair that people have to wade through pages and pages of griping before hitting on one pertinent fact about why one should stay away from PA. Your point about the Authors Market website sounding like a “an amateurish diatribe that sounds as if someone snapped their bras in gym class” is true. But what you don’t realize is that to those who know nothing about PA, some of the postings on this board come across EXACTLY THE SAME WAY.

There are people who have issues with pretty much every company out there legit or not. Do a google search for the phrase “sucks.com” and see what comes up. Sites for griping about every company from Amazon to Walmart. There are millions of people who are quite happy with Amazon and Walmart - so generally speaking, many may be inclined to take the obviously emotional Amazon bashing with a grain of salt.

You and others are emotionally invested in the issue of PA – and as such sometimes come off somewhat irrational, even if your position is valid. And I never said, stated, or implied that your position wasn't valid. A less emotional approach would be far more helpful to those seeking to gain knowledge.