Why is the bewares & background check thread so popular?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Perks

delicate #!&@*#! flower
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
18,981
Reaction score
6,933
Location
At some altitude
Website
www.jamie-mason.com
I have to say I have no idea what you're talking about in either post.

But if the thread is to be revived, I'll say this part of the forums is popular because it's very, very necessary.
 

Perks

delicate #!&@*#! flower
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
18,981
Reaction score
6,933
Location
At some altitude
Website
www.jamie-mason.com
I'll address the post in question. I doubt this will end well. You might generate more fruitful discussions with shorter posts.

This thread is popular because 1) first and foremost, authors are always afraid of being taken advantage of; 2) many authors have been taken advantage of.

This makes sense.

Disclaimer: this thread is unedited and may feature typos - it is therefore copyright protected with safe harbor for Dana Queen. Not for dissemination outside AW.
This is odd, but okay. Anything you write is copyright protected. No need to say so, and very little to fear of that happening.


In the past, traditional publishers usually required an agent. We all know the entertainment industry is plagued by vultures. This includes music, art, and written word.
Okay.

We know the stories too of qualitative authors being dissed over and over and over again until accepted.
What's a "qualitative author"?


Retrospectively too, royalties were usually:

  • 10% for the first 5000 books sold
  • 12% for the second 5000 sold
  • 15% for all titles thereafter
And, this was true for nearly all debut authors.

That's very random. Why did you put that there?

Those with good sales records could make gains on royalties.

Traditional royalties afforded publishers to pay for their workforce and production as well as marketing through internal acquisitions specialists. The agent normally took 15% of the author's royalties for their publicist activities.
Due to this and the fact acceptance was difficult many mid-size publishers began working to help the thousands of "other" authors who weren't accepted.

Those words in that order don't mean anything.

In the industry, authors' titles are ranked, A, B, C, D, etc. Like grades in public school used to be. The ranking pretty much defined the intended market. However, the "other" mid-size publishers offering a suite of services typically suggested they could take a book of lessor ranking and make it a book of higher ranking and sometimes desired money to do so, which resulted in subsidy press - then vanity press.

Like I said, I've never heard about that ranking system.

Both subsidy and vanity have bad reputations; however, it is widely accepted that both do well-serve folks who have a heirloom to produce or if an organization desires to produce a company publication, etc.

Today, there are newer publishers . . . Indie publishers, collaborative publishers, self-publishers (and under the guise of how authors reflect on vanity publishing - self-publishing is truly vanity publishing as well but there is a change in the industry where self-publishing is gaining more respect).

Among ALL these publishing allocations...

What's a "publishing allocation"?

...there are both good people and bad people. Contracts have historically been written with the publisher in mind and were not author friendly. Some companies took permanent rights, copyright, film-rights, etc. And in these cases, much like the music industry and broke famous musicians, it was unfair to an author. So watchdog groups, such as Writer Beware (begun by A. C. Crispin, formerly Ann Tickell, she was a back-story writer for Star Trek, Battle-star Galactica and Pirates of the Caribbean) where authors were warned regarding scams and companies intending to suggest an author was gaining mainstream acceptance as an author through their publishing house, when they were often vanity and therefore, the titles were considered "not" acceptable by mainstream publishing and media.

This I mostly got.

Thereby, sometimes, harming an author's career in publishing.
Not so much about harming an entire career, but certainly stalling it and definitely derailing a particular work.

So, threads like this began largely to police the industry where authors had been taken advantage of in order to help them learn how to navigate their art. For this, threads like this are great.

These threads help a writer navigate the business end, not the art.



As time has evolved however, all publishers have become suspect. And, with social media, if a publisher doesn't accept an author or has issue with an author, it is very easy for them to begin a campaign to cause foul to their former publisher for revenge. And, not everything done by a publisher an author doesn't like is necessarily wrong. For instance, if you learn an author plagiarizes and terminate them, they'll do the following:

  1. Deny they plagiarized
  2. Cry a river about being mistreated
  3. Say they aren't going to take this lying down
  4. Rant and rave
  5. Threaten
  6. Cause mayhem
  7. Seek revenge
No plagiarist is going to say, "Yes, you caught me, I did it." And, those folks can become real virulent in their activities.
This is very random.


I've spoken with many mid-size publishers who are trying to get it all done, many for free, with best intent and desires for their authors and threads like these can be provided a complaint to research based on wrongful and vengeful information.

Again, that sentence makes no sense.

So much so, that many mid-size publishers have sued because claims were unsupported - or if self-policing entities found true issues and the publisher acts to correct them, often the thread continues to share inaccurate commentary and/or doesn't at the least acknowledge the publisher's positive responses to their feedback.

No, many mid-size publishers have not sued about these threads. That's silly.

What I'm sharing with you is this . . . water cooler communication in an office tends to be rumor control and gets the most air time. While brown bag training classes don't.

What does that mean?


It is human nature to gossip and complain. It is good to find issues or risks, air them, correct them and move on. However, presumption...

Did you mean "perception" maybe?


...is not always accurate.

If you meant perception, then sure. And misunderstandings have been cleared up through these discussions.

Perhaps a publisher had a disgruntled employee with privileges and/or unnoted passwords and they go in and make adjustments, which are visible but not known to a publisher. Not every notation by self-appointed watchdogs is accurate.

Have no idea what you're saying here.


What is good about these threads is you learn what foibles to look for. In doing so, it is good to note the cynics. Many authors seem to have an unhealthy love / hate relationship to publishers. That is exacerbated to the point a good publisher (and I've spoken with many) ends up not wanting to work with an author who is 100% negative, suspect, etc. from the get go.

While observing negative commentary, you need to review the positive that is typically ignored.

I think I followed that, and sure, by virtue of the "Bewares" in the heading, there will be lots of cautionary tales in this section of the boards. There is plenty of industry love elsewhere on the boards.

Additionally, authors now desire royalties for even print media at 50% or 40% per title; however, the costs for labor, development, printing, etc. have risen. So a publisher is left with 60% or 50% and authors think - the publisher is making gobs of money. When in essence, the publisher is paying staff, paying for an office, paying utilities, paying for supplies, paying for designers, etc. The costs to produce a book almost equal the percentage a publisher is receiving at the new rates and yet authors want more than was previously supplied traditionally.

Whiplash random.

Websites like these tend to not have a publisher beware of author section. And, there are authors who scam. For instance, an author signs with a publisher who is mid-sized, they get their brand developed, image refined, title reworked up to ghostwritten, they gain visibility, make it to Top Ten in their sub-genre, are advertised on news, radio, etc. and then when they reach their plateau where other publishers contact them - they are not loyal. Instead, they begin performing breaches of contract they know the small press won't sue for. Once terminated, they already have lined up a new house that is a little larger or where their training from publisher #1 will befit them. And, this is not all that rare. Some authors are very savvy at using emerging and small press to gain recognition with full intent to leave at the onset.

Others start a publishing house themselves using the small press information gained during their agreement.

Huh?


As a writer of over 20 years in many industries and as a publisher - I've seen good and bad in both authors and publishers. And, I've seen the most fraudulent, vindictive, rude, and horrible people I've ever seen in my life in the book industry

Okay.

- competition should be about appropriateness.

That makes no sense. What does that even mean?

Also, though, in this industry I've met the most kind, considerate, loyal, fun loving, wonderful people as publishers, agents and authors.
Okay.

Human nature and money is always an interesting thread, which makes this one the same. Just don't mistake the sentiments - fact-check for yourself. Call the publisher or agent. Ask good questions. Take your time. Talk with more than one of each. Don't take anyone's word over your own research, just become informed enough to ask the right questions.

That's what these threads are for. These discussions are part, an honest part, of the very research you are advocating.

Lastly, I don't know how many authors who have sent manuscripts and suggest they worry about someone stealing their work. I guess to feel so confident your work is worth stealing is a good thing but I haven't met a publisher yet who has time to use anyone's work when they are swamped with work themselves. Usually, the author who says that, is one when reviewing their work - more work is required so much so it is a solemn experience to say, "Don't worry, your work is safe, we are not interested in taking it from you."

Where did that come from?

The best thing to do is to trust your intuition or gut feeling after due diligence in fact-finding and a conference with the publisher of choice.

You probably could have just left it at that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.