I have cracked the secret behind all of my posts observing what's wrong, why minority writers complain about running into BS. Someone has even admitted to it all!
According to him (not my words): Publishing is the biggest racket, worse than Al Capone, but at least Al Capone was honest.
Let me clarify, at no point do I have any problems with actual professionals in publishing, including many agents, and publishers, who know what they are doing, and know what to do with a book that comes their way. My problem are with the "para Publishing" circles, and those circles can best be described as "Racketeers." They are the ones who tell writers about imaginary hurdles and hoops writers need to jump through, that do not really exist if you write well, and you can connect to the real professionals. It's all of those other people who need you to be not good enough, who need to make money on you being weaker than you really are, who are the problem. That's the definition of Racketeering.
We have all talked about the mental health strain of running in circles around this para-Publishing circles. Complained how our writing abilities are mirrored back to us so disproportionately smaller than reality. It is all part of the game for the para-publishing circles to peddle their wares. Whatever their lie is, it is directly connected to whatever special service they propose to offer to "fix the problem." It is never more clear now with the kind of non-fiction proposal I have been working on, and my full "impressive resume." Apparently, which causes racketeers to see dollar signs instead of motivation to provide me minimalistic consulting services that I need.
When I began this journey, I mentioned how baffling it was to me given my connectedness and platform. However, as a non-fiction writer, I was incognito, without these things front and centre, but I still found incredulity in the kinds of experiences I had for three years. Enough to make me feel insecure that I would be deemed "difficult to work with" in the industry leading to problems with agents or publishers, who should be above this kind of drama and fray.
However, when I have the ability to tap into those communities directly with the kind of best-selling potential that I have now, then it creates a stark juxtaposition many writers may not have the benefit of such a vantage point. Hence, I find it important to share this contrast and specific examples with those who might not have this kind of vantage point to compare reality directly with the kinds of lies they are sold by para-publishers to diminish the writer's ability.
I want to start first by asking what should be done? They perpetuate this mental health barrage, and hoop jumping, which discourages so many writers. The only way to stop the behavior is to stop its profitability, and when they call me "difficult to work with," that's probably what they fear most: that I would reveal the truth I know and confront them with directly. Here I am. That is exactly what I am about to do. For the benefit of all writers, for the protection of mental health, and for the ceasation of these predatory practices.
HERE WE GO:
To provide context, let me share some things with you about the specific situation I'm presenting. I have a huge platform, that is not defined by social media, and is more influential than social media. I have worked hard to build this experience and relationships and networking. Therefore, the impact also results in high demand messaging and solutions. The two combine undeniable marketability and best-selling potential, and that has been validated by industry professionals. I have a top agent already interested in the proposal, and a journalist who beta read the proposal wants to connect me with an Exec at a Big Five Publisher. I mention these things to provide the contrast - I know when a para-publishing consultant says anything to diminish the potential of the book, it is because they have agenda they need to sell me on, instead of approaching me as knowledgable and humility with willingness to provide scaled back consulting support I actually require.
The second factor/ experience that brings the juxtaposition to light is my connection to an assistant at a top agency. She has direct observations about what agents who know what they are doing handle some of the questions I have about my proposal and path forward. Some of these questions include:
how to demonstrate the platform where I know more people than god, and the connections I've worked with can be counted on for inclusion in the project;
cowriter - I have approached a friend who is a bestselling author and had mixed responses. originally we were on the same page that my agent would send her agent an offer, but then I got confusing responses;
format - is it supposed to look like a power point presentation? Or a business proposal?;
sections - executive format
example content - have received mixed messages on this. one group said if the proposal is good enough, you don't need example chapters. standard is 2-3 chapters. One racketeer told me I needed 100. Clearly I knew that was a lie!
This is the problem, because of the racketeering, it becomes difficult to know which way is up, what reality really is, versus all of the gaslighting and trickery going on by all of these competing agendas to sell their particular business model built around their particular expertise. Bottom line, they want to rake in $1000/ customer minimum or you are not worth their time. Therefore, they will angle whatever narrative that they think creates fear in the writer to feel the need for that particular service.
Well, that's complicated isn't it? Which is it? $1000 to ghostwrite or edit 100 sample pages? $200 per hour to make your proposal the way some publishing has-been likes to tailor all of his results to look the same while he argues with your about your platform or title, and tells you despite the industry validation, he "knows the agent personally" who has already expressed interest, and that agent "won't see the commercial viability" while the racketeer is arguing with you about the platform or cowriting question above contradicting the reality you already know?
If writers are going mad, it is not them. It is the racketeers. It is this constant barrage of made up hurdles. The mental health problems are the logical response to this kind of goal post moving, crazy making, and gaslighting. The writers are bombarded with sick messages from these greedy people that they can never really understand what top agents and publishers know.
I am here to tell you that you can. At least to some extent.
One younger agent I've known a while who works on a friends' book I have read a LOT of versions of a LOT of chapters provided for editor feedback for the publisher, claimed if an author wanted a cowriter, he wouldn't accept the proposal.
The assistant to top senior agents said they know so many people in the industry, they will bring in any and all collaborators to help the project be at the top level of production.
The agent assistant said that regarding the platform and network I already have, I don't need those soft-commitments, because the right PR firm is going to know how to get what's needed from the people who know me.
The demand I have is more transparency and less of these mind boggling lies that serve no purpose except to confuse people. For no reason, except confusion allows the Racketeers to sell their brand of narrative that makes them money and they want people to believe.
I guess the question is to writers: WHAT WILL YOU DO ABOUT IT? Will. you start sharing the rackets with each other? Will you join me in confronting every single para-publishing bad actor and "be difficult to work with" when they tell you one of these lies about what you need for your writing to succeed?
How do we find editors who can be trusted? I would conjecture or propose that we can't until these practices are ended. These practices will not end unless we force them to.