This is the blog of a company that fell into the publishing industry through the love of feeling an ink-and-paper book in your hands.

We don't pretend to know what we're doing, leaving us dealing with the realities of the modern publishing industry, harboring numerous iconoclastic ideas, and having an internet-sized repository of information at our fingertips. The blog is here to let us express our ideas, communicate among members across long distances, and act like we're an authority on something we know little about...and isn't that exactly what blogging is all about?

More Posts
December 2007
September 2007
August 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
September 2006
July 2006
June 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005

Blogs For Readers dot Com

Link here, please!

Publisher's Responsibility for Factual Books
30 Jan 2006, 4:33:44 pm

We've been following the "A Million Little Pieces" debacle for our own personal interest in the downfall of (in my opinion) a poor-quality writer who rose to enormous heights thanks to Oprah, but as a publisher, I'd be remiss if I hadn't considered what an event like this would mean if one of our books had succeeded so greatly then fallen so hard.

The Wall Street Journal discusses the publishing industry's excuse from responsibility, that the publisher relies on the truthiness of the author's manuscript, and they just can't afford fact-checkers to ensure that everything is true enough to be published.

I read The Smoking Gun's report before it made the worldwide press, and at that time knew nothing about the book, only recognizing the book's cover from my last Barnes & Noble visit. The points they make are very firm, with little room for Frey to explain away mistaken memories or confusion about events -- but it took the Smoking Gun, an expert in investigative digging, to figure out the flaws in Frey's story. Compare this to errors in the glossary of science textbooks (I've found several in my life). Would a fact-checker hired by a publisher actually catch these, without devoting a level of work equivalent to the author themselves?

Still, publishers do bear a certain amount of responsibility to make sure that the author has no intention to defraud or falsify their book's contents. We've got a non-fiction series in the works, and we will be watching the intent that the author has to provide valid facts, even if we do not actually verify every item in the book. Frey's publisher could not have reasonably fact-checked every detail of his incarceration, but they should have looked at his intent - having shopped his book as fiction first should have been a clue, and while not easily researched, it would have been easier to discover than the exact circumstances of Frey's arrest.

. . . . . . . . .