Support NeoGAF

[War Peaceman]

The clue here is that it was told to him by his agent.

 

[poppabk]

He got his book published, what exactly is the problem? A single company choosing not to publish a work for political reasons if true might be a little suspect, but it's not censorship.

 

[Zelias]

If he was dropped because of that, that's a silly decision by HarperCollins (though still one they're entitled to take).

That is a gargantuan if, though...

 

[BlackLagoon]

Robert Heinlein seemed to do pretty well for himself. Though he may be a bit more libertarian, it's close enough for me to be an example.

Heinlein's politics seemed all over the place to me. Future History Venus is like a solid kick in the shins for liberterianism, and several of his books have the protagonist end up in some kind of free love hippie commune.

 

[benjipwns]

Big corporation deciding that book from well reviewed and sold author should not be published because of their political views is what would happen in dystopian future if nazi germany won. It should not happen today.

Well, yes, the Nazi state would probably tell its single approved publishing house what to publish and not publish.

In this case though, the state isn't involved.

and several of his books have the protagonist end up in some kind of free love hippie commune.

Not necessarily unlibertarian as long as they're all there voluntarily.

 

[Sushi Nao]

Heinlein's politics seemed all over the place to me. Future History Venus is like a solid kick in the shins for liberterianism, and several of his books have the protagonist end up in some kind of free love hippie commune.

You know Time Enough for Love eh? lol. Great book.

 

[andythinkpad]

I feel like getting a copy of Soda Pop Soldier to give him some support (the sci-fi topic interest me too), but it will give money to Harper Collins?

Does he have any self published stuff?

 

[Griss]

"When the editing process fails completely"

What an ginormous asshole that editor must be. You know *if* all of this happened as the author says.

 

[Carcetti]

I feel like getting a copy of Soda Pop Soldier to give him some support (the sci-fi topic interest me too), but it will give money to Harper Collins?

Does he have any self published stuff?

And his outrage advertising campaign is working as intended.

I'm repeating myself here but I have serious doubts about Harper Collins anti-conservative agenda when they have
a) several Christian sub-brands (imprints)
b) a book line dedicated only to 'cutting-edge conservative ideas'

 

[Pantaghana]

As someone that is pro-choice, the motivation for the AI rebellion seems alright. Doesn't seem to be framed as some sort of morality lesson on the evils of abortion, and no reason to reject publication.

But holy crap does this guy misunderstand free speech and censorship. Free speech does not guarantee you a platform.
If I spent eight hours slamming my face on the keyboard and then tried to publish that "work", refusal from a publisher is certainly not censorship or a ban.

 

[Fusebox]

I was on his side until the concentration camps comment, now I dislike him but I still don't have a problem with the premise of his book.

 

[my name is ed]

Of course they do... and they get published. I have read so many sci-fi books and to get book censored due to what is described there is outrageous. Looking over his amazon reviews, which are very positive, nobody brought politics into it. And this was months ago before censorship was known about. It is also true for his other numerous zombie-apocalypse books rated well on Amazon where i could not see anyone writing anything about politics. So his books are not political.

Big corporation deciding that book from well reviewed and sold author should not be published because of their political views is what would happen in dystopian future if nazi germany won. It should not happen today.

People arguing for political censorship in sci-fi is just awesome. I thought we are much better than that in 2016.

You understand Harper Collins is a private company right? much like getting banned on GAF isn't a violation of your freedom of speech, HC deciding they don't want to publish your book isn't a violation of your free speech. You sound like the author.

 

[spwolf]

Kick it down a couple of notches.

This guy is clearly self-aggrandizing and picks a false narrative - that he knows will appeal to a certain conservative market - and takes it to an extreme. His freedom of speech is not being infringed; he got dumped by a publisher because his writing is either not very good, or not marketable to them, or both.

problem with that is that:
a. His books get great reviews from readers on Amazon
b. His books are top sellers on Amazon.

According to Amazon, he is #17 best selling author on Amazon in Kindle> Sci-Fi and #27 best author on Books> Sci-Fi. His book reviews are all between 4 and 5 stars which is as good as it gets.

So people are buying his books and rating them really well. I cant see anywhere anyone mentioning anything about politics so they are not buying them because they are right wing crazies and his ideas of zombie infested future are the right kind.

Now I assume that a reason you are agreeing with the corporate publisher is because you agree with their politics. But thats just wrong.

I am pro-choice in everything. I have voted so many times. I would have the same problem if they decided to drop a book because of its pro-choice plot, and I guess so would you?

 

[War Peaceman]

problem with that is that:
a. His books get great reviews from readers on Amazon
b. His books are top sellers on Amazon.

According to Amazon, he is #17 best selling author on Amazon in Kindle> Sci-Fi and #27 best author on Books> Sci-Fi. His book reviews are all between 4 and 5 stars which is as good as it gets.

So people are buying his books and rating them really well. I cant see anywhere anyone mentioning anything about politics so they are not buying them because they are right wing crazies and his ideas of zombie infested future are the right kind.

Now I assume that a reason you are agreeing with the corporate publisher is because you agree with their politics. But thats just wrong.

I am pro-choice in everything. I have voted so many times. I would have the same problem if they decided to drop a book because of its pro-choice plot, and I guess so would you?

You are pro choice on everything except for publishers choosing what they publish???

 

[Sushi Nao]

problem with that is that:
a. His books get great reviews from readers on Amazon
b. His books are top sellers on Amazon.

According to Amazon, he is #17 best selling author on Amazon in Kindle> Sci-Fi and #27 best author on Books> Sci-Fi. His book reviews are all between 4 and 5 stars which is as good as it gets.

So people are buying his books and rating them really well. I cant see anywhere anyone mentioning anything about politics so they are not buying them because they are right wing crazies and his ideas of zombie infested future are the right kind.

Now I assume that a reason you are agreeing with the corporate publisher is because you agree with their politics. But thats just wrong.

I am pro-choice in everything. I have voted so many times. I would have the same problem if they decided to drop a book because of its pro-choice plot, and I guess so would you?

...the guy intentionally lied about censorship in a poorly written victim-claim about his book that unironically rails against SJW's. He can kick fuckin rocks.

 

[andycapps]

I don't know or care about the author's politics, but that seems like a pretty standard sci-fi setup to me.

Seems like a bit of an editorial over-reaction to me.

Basically this. I'd be interested to see Harper Collins take on this.

 

[Carcetti]

It'll probably be something like 'We dropped this shitty writer like a sack of hot potatoes because, like, have you read his work? It's terrible.'

Seriously, I read the preview chapters that are online. Dire stuff.

 

[War Peaceman]

Thinking on it more, the story is the system working exactly as it should.

One publisher doesn't like his book, refuses to publish. Nick Cole is therefore free to go and publish his book elsewhere. He gets published on Amazon and is apparently doing well with solid sales and reviews.

What he is doing is trying to drum up sales by tying into existing controversies. Scummy move.

It may be that HarperCollins didn't like the implicit message of his work - we can;t really know. Even he doesn't know (his agent told him). But is that a bad thing? He wasn't blackballed by the industry. His existing publisher just chose not to publish his work.

 

[Zaphrynn]

Due to his comparison of concentration camps and talking about writers being the final defense for freedom, I'm guessing this writer is also being extremely hyperbolic about what his editor/publisher said.

Either way, it's their choice not to publish something for just about any reason when it comes to the content of a book. Assuming what he said is true, that's the publisher's decision, and their loss if the book sold well. I wouldn't expect a Christian company to publish pro-LGBT literature, even if I disagree with said company's views.

This isn't censorship and it isn't a sign of dangerous things to come. Lol.

 

[benjipwns]

I feel like getting a copy of Soda Pop Soldier to give him some support (the sci-fi topic interest me too), but it will give money to Harper Collins?

Does he have any self published stuff?

The "censored" book and one I linked in the OP is "self-published" through Amazon. And maybe that post-apocalyptic one he mentioned is? I'm sure you can see the publishers for each on his Amazon page.

Shut it!

 

[BlackLagoon]

You know Time Enough for Love eh? lol. Great book.

I don't think I've read that one, but as I recall those "hippie communes" show up to varying degrees in the The Cat that Walks Through Walls, The Door into Summer, Stranger in a Strange Land, and probably others I've forgotten. To me it always felt like a far more prevalent feature of his works than the focus on earning your rights in Starship Troopers.

 

[Sushi Nao]

I don't think I've read that one, but as I recall those "hippie communes" show up to varying degrees in the The Cat the Walks, The Door into Summer, Stranger in a Strange Land, and probably others I've forgotten. To me it always felt like a far more prevalent feature of his works than the focus on earning your rights in Starship Troopers.

Ah, ok, it's the final Lazarus Long story, about the oldest man in the universe.

I feel like getting a copy of Soda Pop Soldier to give him some support (the sci-fi topic interest me too), but it will give money to Harper Collins?

Does he have any self published stuff?

Red Lobster

 

[MrGerbils]

By the way, it's pretty funny how WASP conservatives are always the worst examples of outrage culture they complain about.

This x 1,000.

And I love all the people in here who only read his one sided rant, take it completely at face value, and decide to join the outrage over "censorship."

The persecution complexes some of these people like the original author suffer from are absolutely unreal.

IF the publisher saw one chapter about abortion and decided not to publish it because of that one story beat, then that's silly. But judging by just the writing in his rant and the places he immediately goes with it, I think it's fairly safe to guess that there's more to the story here.

I'm sure him getting publicity for getting outraged at "SJW"s will get him a ton of sales though. So probably working exactly as planned for him.

 

[timetokill]

Heinlein's politics seemed all over the place to me. Future History Venus is like a solid kick in the shins for liberterianism, and several of his books have the protagonist end up in some kind of free love hippie commune.

There's nothing really "unlibertarian" about a free love hippie commune though

 

[Alt183]

Got dropped like a rock by his publisher, and now working up sales for his self-published book. Since he states he didn't have a contract for the book, HarperCollins can say it wasn't a story worth pursuing and leave it at that; and that's most likely the truth. The blog post is proof enough why any publisher would drop him.

 

[BunnyBear]

I think it is awesome that people support corporations censoring silly sci-fi books due to politics. This is not a philosophical book, it is not about religion. It is a sci-fi book. There is nothing outrageous in there and there are thousands of other sci-fi books that are way more politically incorrect than this one.

I assume it is because it suits their political view. Lets now imagine a world where writes that support your view are censored. Is that fine? No, it is not.

Quickly glancing through his Amazon book list like you, he is really well reviewed and sells well. Corporation censoring him is wrong. There is no ifs and buts here.

Whats next, are we going to burn the ones that we dont like?

But they didn't censor him? They just decided not to publish it?

 

[captainnapalm]

Don't know if his story is true, but it wouldn't surprise me. The new authoritarian left has been pretty well documented by now. Back in the 80s, it was the right doing this sort of thing.

 

[Matt]

problem with that is that:
a. His books get great reviews from readers on Amazon
b. His books are top sellers on Amazon.

According to Amazon, he is #17 best selling author on Amazon in Kindle> Sci-Fi and #27 best author on Books> Sci-Fi. His book reviews are all between 4 and 5 stars which is as good as it gets.

So people are buying his books and rating them really well. I cant see anywhere anyone mentioning anything about politics so they are not buying them because they are right wing crazies and his ideas of zombie infested future are the right kind.

Now I assume that a reason you are agreeing with the corporate publisher is because you agree with their politics. But thats just wrong.

I am pro-choice in everything. I have voted so many times. I would have the same problem if they decided to drop a book because of its pro-choice plot, and I guess so would you?

A publisher has every right to publisher or not publish whatever they want, for whatever reason (of course depending on the specifics of any given contract with an author). THAT is freedom of speech. Forcing HC to publish this book would be the violation of freedom of speech.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

I was gonna say something about the topic but then I went to the author's site and read how he describes his books. It's amazing.

Listen up, people. This dude is one part King, one part McCarthy and one part Hemingway.

It's like every indie game Kickstarter page I've read

 

[Carcetti]

I really do love this thread. This is just an educated guess but based on what we've seen things went like this.

1. Terrible author couldn't sell his book to publisher, had to self-publish.
2. Terrible author invents a reason why they didn't buy the book because he doesn't want to say the actual reason (it sucks)
3. Makes an online post about how he's being oppressed by evil commies and spreads it to wingnut websites
4. Waits for people to buy his books just for 'support against the evil leftist machine'
5. Mild profits.

 

[Matt]

Don't know if his story is true, but it wouldn't surprise me. The new authoritarian left has been pretty well documented by now. Back in the 80s, it was the right doing this sort of thing.

Yes, the publisher owned by Rupert Murdoch and with specific imprints for both conservative and Christian books is a fine example of some sort of imaginary authoritative left.

Jesus Christ, what the fuck?

 

[tim.mbp]

Got dropped like a rock by his publisher, and now working up sales for his self-published book. Since he states he didn't have a contract for the book, HarperCollins can say it wasn't a story worth pursuing and leave it at that; and that's most likely the truth. The blog post is proof enough why any publisher would drop him.

It just proves there's a vast left wing literati that controls the thoughts of people via the publishing business.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

I don't believe a word of this post.

Don't know if his story is true, but it wouldn't surprise me. The new authoritarian left has been pretty well documented by now. Back in the 80s, it was the right doing this sort of thing.

Show me the receipts.

 

[Slayven]

The publisher is wrong, sounds like a perfectly credible Sci fi setup.


Edit: Why on earth is he a fuckface?

Going by his rant I doubt he has the ability execute it correctly.

 

[travisbickle]

Of course they do... and they get published. I have read so many sci-fi books and to get book censored due to what is described there is outrageous. Looking over his amazon reviews, which are very positive, nobody brought politics into it. And this was months ago before censorship was known about. It is also true for his other numerous zombie-apocalypse books rated well on Amazon where i could not see anyone writing anything about politics. So his books are not political.

Big corporation deciding that book from well reviewed and sold author should not be published because of their political views is what would happen in dystopian future if nazi germany won. It should not happen today.

People arguing for political censorship in sci-fi is just awesome. I thought we are much better than that in 2016.

You live in a free-market capitalist society, the reason a private publisher doesn't publish a book is because they believe it will not sell. You cannot make comparisons to nazi Germany.

Also, he can just post it on the friggin' internet if he believes he's being unfairly censored.

 

[captainnapalm]

Yes, the publisher owned by Rupert Murdoch and with specific imprints for both conservative and Christian books is a fine example of some sort of imaginary authoritative left.

Jesus Christ, what the fuck?

Even if its an editor or certain publishing arm acting independently, that can still be an example of political interference.

 

[captive]

Occam's Razor: His book sucks.

But it won't stop the feining of Oppression and Censorship. Modern conservatives love playing the victim card.

if his book sucks, why didnt the editor say so?

Sounds pretty unusual how the editor handled this situation, not even telling him what happened.



I dont see the problem with the books premise, i've read much worse in a book before, and seen much worse in movies before.

 

[Carcetti]

if his book sucks, why didnt the editor say so?

We have one super reliable witness for this whole thing, the famed author Nick Cole. Surely the Hemingway / Cormac McCarthy of our time wouldn't just make shit up.

 

[captive]

You live in a free-market capitalist society, the reason a private publisher doesn't publish a book is because they believe it will not sell. You cannot make comparisons to nazi Germany.

Also, he can just post it on the friggin' internet if he believes he's being unfairly censored.

i obviously have no idea how his contract was structured, but id bet if he was writing that last book to fulfill his contract that the publisher owns the rights to publish it.

We have one super reliable witness for this whole thing, the famed author Nick Cole. Surely the Hemingway / Cormac McCarthy of our time wouldn't just make shit up.

well fine, if you just want to assume everyone is a liar, thats a great way to go through life.

 

[Slayven]

Oh mounter hunter Larry Corria, yeah I use to read his books until I found out what a right wing nut he was.

 

[Matt]

Even if its an editor or certain publishing arm acting independently, that can still be an example of political interference.

An editor not liking a book for whatever reason is not an example of authoritarianism.

 

[Sushi Nao]

if his book sucks, why didnt the editor say so?

Sounds pretty unusual how the editor handled this situation, not even telling him what happened.



I dont see the problem with the books premise, i've read much worse in a book before, and seen much worse in movies before.

Yes, this man certainly has no vested financial interest in misrepresenting the publisher

This blog post doesn't stand up to even a cursory critical read.

well fine, if you just want to do a critical read on everything you see on the internet, thats a legitimately great way to go through life.

minor fix for you

 

[benjipwns]

I really do love this thread. This is just an educated guess but based on what we've seen things went like this.

1. Terrible author couldn't sell his book to publisher, had to self-publish.
2. Terrible author invents a reason why they didn't buy the book because he doesn't want to say the actual reason (it sucks)
3. Makes an online post about how he's being oppressed by evil commies and spreads it to wingnut websites
4. Waits for people to buy his books just for 'support against the evil leftist machine'
5. Mild profits.

Correia debunks this left-wing nonsense:

Since I’m an author with GET PAID in my mission statement, I wouldn’t blame him if it was, but I don’t think so. That story is far too familiar, and I know too many other authors where similar things have happened. However, I warned Nick yesterday to get ready. This story appears to have gone viral. He is probably about to get slandered with every vile accusation imaginable by the CHORFs.

We’ve seen repeatedly that any time an author breaks from the group think, they’re going to get slammed. If you say anything at all about the existing system, it is either a publicity stunt, or you’re a delusional liar, or a bitter whiner with sour grapes. At no point in time does the idea that you’re telling the truth as you perceive it actually ever enter into their narrative.

Yet you can tell the truth and get publicity. Once this story broke Nick’s self pubbed version of this book went right to the top of the charts. Scaring off 50% of your audience? Nonsense. He’s sitting at #1 in like three genres right now. Like I said, the gatekeepers are crumbling. Their ignorance would be laughable if it hadn’t already screwed over so many good authors.

Here is the beautiful part… For decades the left held all the power. Readers are sick of their shit. The fact that standing up to them can actually be a sales boost demonstrates that their power is waning. You know why I talk about the size of my royalty checks? Because nothing pisses the bullies off more than being successful despite their best efforts to trash you.

Nick is getting publicity off of this? GOOD. That means creators no longer have to be beholden to the whims of every twenty something junior editor with a gender studies degree in Manhattan.

 

[pdog128]

This seems like a non-story.

As others have said, the publisher has absolutely no obligation (he says he wasn't under contract) to publish anything. They can refuse to publish a book for whatever reason. That's not censorship or a freedom of speech issue.

 

[dantevsninjas]

I'm keen to hear how you think he has misunderstood freedom of speech OP...

Simple. His book exists and is available to the public. Freedom of Speech does not guarantee you a platform.

I'd be more keen to hear how you think he hadn't misunderstood the concept.

problem with that is that:
a. His books get great reviews from readers on Amazon
b. His books are top sellers on Amazon.

According to Amazon, he is #17 best selling author on Amazon in Kindle> Sci-Fi and #27 best author on Books> Sci-Fi. His book reviews are all between 4 and 5 stars which is as good as it gets.

50 Shades of Gray was a blockbuster smash hit. Have you read any of it? The writing is terrible. Popular != Good.

 

[Slayven]

Side note these right wing authors are something else. I browse the self publish section on amazon and smashbooks regularity. They sure do love America being taken down by EMPs and their guns. Oh god they describe guns in such loving detail like sex scenes.

 

[yyzjohn]

I really do love this thread. This is just an educated guess but based on what we've seen things went like this.

1. Terrible author couldn't sell his book to publisher, had to self-publish.
.

But Harper Collins has already published books by him.
http://www.harpercollins.com/search-results?contributor=nick-cole

 

[Carcetti]

Correia debunks this left-wing nonsense:

Correia is a peddler of nonsense who created a martyrdom movement out of a idea that right wing authors are some sort of an oppressed minority because they don't get enough awards and not because some authors aren't just that great.

But Harper Collins has already published books by him.
http://www.harpercollins.com/search-results?contributor=nick-cole

Are you trying to sell that as some new info here? That only proves they are aware of his selling potential (let me guess, not super high).

Have you people read his work? I read those sample chapters on the site. Ehhhhhhhhhhhh.

 

[AYF 001]

Plot twist: The publishing group is in fact owned by a right-wing group. He was in fact censored, but not for the reasons he expects. His editors misinterpret his "Rise of the machines" story not as a pro-life analogy, but as a metaphor about how groups that were enslaved and oppressed would be justified in destroying their masters and oppressors. He is stricken from the company, and must seek justice in the most backwards manner possible. Will he succeed? Can he defeat the imaginary liberal boogeyman hiding around every corner in he media?

Probably not.

 

[benjipwns]

Correia is a peddler of nonsense who created a martyrdom movement out of a idea that right wing authors are some sort of an oppressed minority because they don't get enough awards and not because some authors aren't just that great.

Why wouldn't they win tons of awards if not for a political conspiracy?!?