lb_lee: M.D. making a shocked, confused face (serious thought)
[personal profile] lb_lee
What is this?

Okay, how can I summarize this.  Someone wants to make a movie out of a self-published book.  Somehow gets the idea that if they game the New York Times Bestseller List to get the #1 spot, they will get a movie deal, starring herself as the protagonist.  A lot of money gets thrown around, a Potemkin publisher is set up to give this book the slightest lacquer of legitimacy, bulk orders are made at New York Times-reporting stores to game the system, nobody actually buys this book... oh, and actors from Buffy: The Vampire Slayer, American Pie, and Twilight are involved.

Plus some bands.

I swear to god, this is the craziest thing I've seen in a while involving book publishing.  What on earth even is this.

Some intrepid newshounds are on the case, updating as new info comes in.

I don't even know what to make of this.

Date: 2017-08-30 06:05 pm (UTC)
thatlasswiththechocobos: (Default)
From: [personal profile] thatlasswiththechocobos
OMG I saw that. Just. Wut. ON all levels.

Edit: I think there was something about her pinching the cover art too? :/
Edited Date: 2017-08-30 06:06 pm (UTC)

Date: 2017-09-05 09:30 pm (UTC)
thatlasswiththechocobos: (Default)
From: [personal profile] thatlasswiththechocobos
What the actual what! Oyyyy. Although a cynical part of me kind of says if she can spin it right, at least loads of people know the book now, she probably *could* get more audience just from it being known...>.>

Date: 2017-09-08 11:15 am (UTC)
thatlasswiththechocobos: (Default)
From: [personal profile] thatlasswiththechocobos
Fair point! That was the weirdest bit, they didn't even have any in stock to send, even if they were flat out bad??

Date: 2017-09-15 05:25 pm (UTC)
thatlasswiththechocobos: (Default)
From: [personal profile] thatlasswiththechocobos
Erk true! I can't help but wonder what it was LIKE, I have to say...morbid curiosity! :/

Date: 2017-08-30 06:11 pm (UTC)
the_collective: (Elle books)
From: [personal profile] the_collective
Wow that is BONKERS.


Date: 2017-08-31 12:54 pm (UTC)
the_collective: (Elle books)
From: [personal profile] the_collective
HA! Perfect.


Date: 2017-08-30 10:55 pm (UTC)
mirrorofsmoke: The words "We are Groot" and a picture of Baby Groot on an icon with a swirly galaxy background. (Default)
From: [personal profile] mirrorofsmoke
The mango-shitting fuck? O.o


Date: 2017-08-31 01:05 am (UTC)
clare_dragonfly: A cartoon eight-year-old boy holds up a book and looks at it with shock and anger. (Calvin & Hobbes: angry book)
From: [personal profile] clare_dragonfly
It is fun to see some actual consequences for people gaming the NYT list :D I have no specific examples, but I've heard it happens a lot, though rarely quite so blatantly.

Date: 2017-08-31 01:55 am (UTC)
procedimus_una: Watcher (watcher symbol)
From: [personal profile] procedimus_una
I saw that going around on Tumblr and it's absolutely bonkers. I'm curious to see how this all ends, but in the meantime...

Date: 2017-08-31 01:56 am (UTC)
starways: Photo of a section of a nebula, which is mostly colorful and gaseous but has several bright and distinct stars (Default)
From: [personal profile] starways
Thank you for bringing this to our attention, it's one of the funniest things we've read all week.

Date: 2017-08-31 06:44 pm (UTC)
From: [personal profile] asnarkoftrolls


Date: 2017-09-02 08:00 pm (UTC)
flowergarden: flowers (Default)
From: [personal profile] flowergarden

Unfortunately for the general hilarity of that, I saw some further sleuthing sadly debunking that that was the person who wrote My Immortal (probably). I'd need to find the post again, but something about how that person's profile name didn't show up on google searches, indicating that although the account was old, it had only recently changed names to that. Also the fact that a wiki dedicated to finding out everything possible about My Immortal had never heard of that account. I think those are the major points.

The drama is constantly thickening on this!

Date: 2017-09-05 04:52 am (UTC)
lithophiles: Teenage girl with short brown hair, light brown skin, amber eyes, wearing an orange shirt & a yellow hair bow. (nina)
From: [personal profile] lithophiles
I have no idea actually, but as... *looks around* erm, cough, an occasional trollfic writer myself in niche fandoms (just to be absurd, not to hurt anyone), I've always been firmly on the side that My Immortal was meant to be a trollfic from the start, the real mastermind(s) quietly slipped off and watched their Internet legacy unfold, and a few people jumped in to capitalize on people's credulity about it by claiming to have been the author.

Not because I'm one of those people who's all like "If this is real, I HAVE NO FAITH LEFT IN HUMANITY." There are some really grotesque misogynistic rape-torture fics out there that can lower your faith in humanity a lot more than a purported teenage girl's self-insertion fic which is legitimately hilarious in its badness on the slim chance it was ever serious, if you want to use badfic and not, like, politics to lower your faith in humanity for some reason. Actually, the 50 Shades of Grey fandom makes me worry more about the state of humanity than My Immortal does. Like when I read this woman saying that 50 Shades and a vibrator is the best way to "get her in the mood" she's ever found, I'm like "...can we please get our respective DNA tested to check to see if you actually are the same species as me."

But! The point is more, I guess, that my trollficcing side job gave me an interesting amount of insight into reasons why people write trollfic and what investment they can have in letting others believe that their silly author persona is serious, and the appeal of "stand back and watch the reactions" without any malice attached. The appeal of My Immortal seemed to be at least half in the orchestrated plot of its "writing process," her realtime "feedback" to people's comments on it and the various "plot twists" of the author supposedly getting her account hacked. I guess I find it amusing partly because it seems that no real people were actually harmed in the making of it, whereas I've seen a number of other manufactured online dramas that used similar "unfolding plot" and "this person was really me" tactics but it was meant to libel the reputations of real people. ...which was definitely not at all amusing.

And since we still don't know what the author or authors' real motivations were even if you assume it was a trollfic, the lack of "conclusion" to the "saga" seems to have kept the fic in people's memory... which is one of those things I find interesting on an entirely meta level.

Date: 2017-09-06 07:07 pm (UTC)
flowergarden: flowers (Default)
From: [personal profile] flowergarden

Definitely agree on this stuff! Also, I need to read this thing again (it's been years), but there was one thing that left me with absolutely no doubt that this was all a joke: there is one paragraph where every single "typo" is misspelling something as a science-related term (say, photon instead of photo, then torque instead of touch, something like that), several different times in a really concentrated spot. That's not accidental. That's someone having tons of fun with how many times they can insert a science typo.

I love it because it takes a lot of skill to hit that line, where it's bad enough to be really funny but not so bad it's just dull. It's a great piece of writing in that way.

Date: 2017-09-02 11:41 pm (UTC)
lithophiles: An ink dip pen lying on a piece of paper with some writing on it, with pink flower petals scattered across it. (sophie)
From: [personal profile] lithophiles
Um... Wow... o_O I know things have changed a lot in the past seventeen years, and the Internet is much more of a marketing tool than it used to be and that selling electronic copies of books is now a big thing, but this is seriously the weirdest thing I've ever read about the publishing industry. @_@

Sometimes it makes me feel better to read about shady behind-the-scenes actions in the publishing industry to bootstrap various people to Bestseller Status, or about how reviews in genre fiction can get really circle-jerky, kind of like how a lot of video game reviewers just magically find a new game to be the best thing ever after they get free swag and a test play session and possibly money from the developers. Partly because it reminds me that a lot of authors become bestsellers not because they were amazingly good in a way I can never be, but because they got the right combination of promoters, publicity, hitting on all the themes that are considered popular at a given time, shady reviewers who seem to have a really vested interest in giving glowing reviews, and/or have a fanbase so dedicated that they no longer care that an author has reached immunity-from-editors status.

But this is, yeah, genuinely the weirdest thing I've ever seen or heard of in publishing. Basically, there's... a book that nobody can even prove the existence of, which is being bulk-sold "in theory" for the sake of casting a movie with the tagline BASED ON THE NEW YORK TIMES #1 BESTSELLER instead of just, you know, MAKING A MOVIE which seems like the real intention here? And... Amaranth says it's a pretty bad intention based on how few "Based on the #1 YA Bestseller!" movies are any good or make any money. Even a bad series like Twilight was legitimately making money as a book series first. The idea here seems to be that they're doing everything they can to make a movie in a genre that has traditionally not been very good (movies based on YA paranormal romance or fantasy books) by saying the "book" was a bestseller? Like all the movies in this genre that... were poorly done and lost money at the box office? WTF? Hearing "based on a bestseller" honestly makes me want to see the hypothetical movie less, not more.

Edited Date: 2017-09-02 11:43 pm (UTC)

oh my tangly goodnes -

Date: 2017-09-20 02:12 am (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
(this is KC.. trying to type while Charlie the Cat tries to be omnipresent..)
hee, i found what i wanted -- MOAR TALK about this nonsense-event :D

but then i read somethin' that i had to comment on cuz it touched my heart (and hey, it happened to be in the last post of the thread, so.. woo!)

"I am someone who churns out work to feed myself."

i was moved by the implications then i realized it was literal. cuz, i think i have been for almost twenty years been resigned that the churn i churn is only read by me. so, um, figuratively / emotionally feeding myself. but then i think i can only ingest emotions in narrative form, soo,

[GROSS BUG EATING ANALOGY COMIN' UP] being like the bug that's gotta urp stomach-acid up on things to do its pre-digesting externally kind of makes sense
[/end gross bug]

ok, um.
but yeah, no harm in being or self-labelling as a hack. honestly, i think quality or the perception of quality is dogfarfle; i'd rather read something that's saving one's life than ye greate arte; one's a creation the other's a product..

the cat let me type at the cost of lying on my arm so i can't lie down now :P but he's very happy. (it's ALMOST a metaphor for my taking the art discussion in the direction of thread-hijack, but being able to say it made me very happy).
Page generated Sep. 24th, 2017 06:35 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios