Troy

Rachel Renée Russell’s DORK DIARIES children’s books series has sold over 30 million copies with translation into 36 languages worldwide 222 weeks on the New York Times bestsellers list. 

The Dork Diaries is a fantastically successful series. The main characters are not Black. Rachel said in an interview with The New York Times that she wanted her books to appeal to a wide audience.

Would it really be impossible for a Black main character to appeal to a wide (i.e. white) audience?

For convenience I embedded the program @Wendy Jones referenced above

Here is a link to Farhad Manjoo's "State of the Art" column on The New York Times.

I wish we were talking more about these issues in the Black community.

Puerto Rico, is an island that got pummeled by two massive storms that may have been made more massive because of man made climate change. 

There is very little they can do, on their own, to recover. The days of living in anything less than a bomb shelter on these islands in the middle of the Caribbean may be coming to an end; if two or three of these massive storms are going to come by each year.

You are talking about a family I'm talking about an individual.   No one in the Rothschild's family comes close to Bezos. 

Indeed much of the wealth attributed to the Rothschilds exaggerated hyped up in social media memes without basis in reality.

Hey Del I'm not sure what you mean by your statement: 
 

18 hours ago, Delano said:

So if they create a little Big Bang. So they want to  create a  singularity . That replicates the moment space and time were created. So if it goes critics and expands what can they do to stop  it.

The notion that the activities at CERN are an attempt to unify religions and mythology with physics, and by extension, with each other is false.   I think that is just wishful thinking.  I don't think spirituality can be discovered with science.  I don't think science can prove or disprove religious belief.  

https://socialjusticebooks.org/about/why-boycott-amazon/

A review of 190 articles from the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and the Bezos-owned Washington Post over the past year paints a picture of almost uniformly uncritical–ofttimes boosterish–coverage. None of the articles were investigative exposes, 6 percent leaned negative, 54 percent were straight reporting or neutral in tone, and 40 percent were positive, mostly with a fawning or even press release–like tone.

The last major investigative piece we found in any of these three publications was a 4,500-word critique of Amazon’s labor practices in the New York Times  (8/16/15) almost two years ago. Considering that Amazon is the fourth-most-valuable company in the world, with a 43 percent (and growing) share of all US online commerce, it’s a striking absence of journalistic scrutiny.

@Pioneer1, Don't leave out how Reconstruction started and why it ended. That also explains a lot about our predicament today and many of the ame strategies are in place.

Today when Black folks create something of value it is either run out of business or we sell it away. 

@Cynique, Regarding the Baby Boomers ABSOLUTELY.

@Antonio Ingram, don't sleep on the White organization. Every job on Wall Street that I ever got was because of white folks. I know it is a different industry, but I'm sure it is not much different.  One day when you are in a position of power perhaps you'll change that. If you do you will be making a much needed change.

Hmmm... @Cynique, if I get a chance I really need to find what Hawking actually said, in context.  If you have a source please share it.  I skimmed the article and did not see anything but I may have missed it.

People have suggested that LHC could create a Black hole, but every physicist I've heard when presented with the question said it was preposterous.

@Delano, what does "New Age: mean to you?  When I wrote "New Agey" I was not being technical as was using more of les as a catch all for all the spiritual pursuits that emerged in the last 100 years and are outside traditional religions--you know from crystal gazers to tree huggers 

As someone who has paid many writers over the years.  I've never asked a writer to write something for free.  If they offer that is another thing--even then I provide some form reciprocity.  It is just how we do in my community.

Now having a piece in the Atlantic is a big deal for a writer, but seriously, The Atlantic should be ashamed of themselves for saying they can't pay--sure they can pay they just chose not to pay that writer.

You see when publications get big, and writers get desperate, they will write for free (exposure).  The Huffington Post famously took advantage of this imbalance by not paying their bloggers as part of there business model.  Of course Ariana began fantastically rich and the writers got left with a HuffPo byline.

When writers write for large publications for free they actually make it harder for all writers to earn a living, because they reduce the value of their work in the market place.

I wrote an article the same year as The Atlantic article above “5 Things Writers Must Do To Survive Online.”  One of the 5 things was don't write for wealthy sites for free.  It also depresses wages for all writers by making it impossible for smaller publication to survive, because that can not compete against the likes of The Atlantic who can get writers to write for free.

I know publishers of several magazine --all defunct--who complained that writers would reject the paltry sums their magazines offered to pay, meanwhile these same writers fought to write for Ariana for free.

All that said, if I were a writer looking to make a name for myself today, I'd have to take the offer of writing for The Atlantic for free--at least once.  You can't change the world by yourself.  But I would absolute retain the copyright for ANYTHING I gave someone for free.  That where i draw the line.  

@Antonio Ingram, I would network and get to know other writers and those in related professions.  Get to know people many if not most opportunities in any career emerge because of who you know.  Join a scriptwriter organization (surely there is one). Consider unpaid internship, volunteer if no opportunity exists and work a 2nd job to pay the bills.  

If you don't have a Blog start one.  If you are going to write for someone for free, let it be yourself. Even though it is harder than ever to attract readers their is not better way to make you work available to others.  Besides, if you are able to generate some traffic you can earn a living with a Blog.  On my list of the top 50 Black owned websites several are blogs--all of them should generate enough revenue for someone to live on and some do far better.  

Earning a living writing is HARD. But if it is what you love and you have some talent you can make it work. 

“If I am so much of a slut, why don’t you keep your husband out of my bed?” —Delores E. Jordan

That quote is from Michael Jordan's sister (yes the basketball great).  You can read the rest of the except here. 

Now this is from a Jordan's memoir that was published in 2001, but I never knew that Jordan's father, who was subsequently murdered (presumably in an unrelated incident), took the virginity of his own daughter and continued to abuse her for years!

I have no idea how I missed that story!  I was just adding information to the site about Jordan's mother who is an accomplished children's book author whose books have been illustrated by several great illustrators and stumbled across this tragic tale.

@Wendy Jones thanks for making that correction. 

While Amazon may bot be engaging in straight up chattel slavery (that we know of), they don't provide the greatest conditions for the factory workers.  Have you read this research report on Amazon?

@Pioneer1, I'm not denying that racism is a problem.  In fact, I agree with some of what you've described, but where we diverge is on the underlying motivation for the racism.  

I believe racism is a tool of the plutocracy to enrich themselves.  I believe religion has been used for this reason, indeed our education system and culture is designed to create consumers who enrich their masters.

Whether is is the tobacco industry selling us cancer sticks, big pharma making opioids freely available, Wall Street bringing the world's economy to the brink of collapse, Facebook manipulating our election and brainwashing people, or 45 fueling racism, it is all about power and money.  Racism is one of many tools these folks use against us.

You can destroy racism tomorrow and the greats masses of the world's people will still be poor.  

We live in a world where someone like Amazon's Jeff Bezos can accumulate a net worth north of $90B on the backs of factory workers grinding away making slave wages and he is celebrated.  As Bezos builds a monopoly some people even vigorously defend it?!  

Man, racism is a problem but again it is a symptom.  Racism was created to justify slavery.  Educated white folks knew what Black folks accomplished great things in Africa--hell they used this knowledge and then took credit for creating it.  Of course the great masses of people--even black ones don't know this, but we know all the celebrity gossip.  

Sure, we have to fight racism because it is kicking your butts, but the real problem are the plutocrats pulling the levers--impoverishing us all. 

Yes I find all of that stuff interesting too.  I forgot all about the Chariots of the Gods.  I've been told you open your mind and that is went the devil walks in. Helluva thing to tell a kid huh? 

I've heard a number of people in the field say that they wish the phrase "God Particle" was not used.  Again, it just confused people.  The religious right gets riled up to the point they are fighting to eliminate scientific research. 

CNN does the public a disservice when they say things like, "Scientists confirm 'God Particle' Exists."  Scientist have done no such thing, nor have they said such a thing.  This is sloppy reporting and even the description they provided for the Higgs Boson was pretty weak too.  

I'm just using this as another way to collect data.  I'm MUCH happier when people subscribe directly, and they can read the newsletter on any device.

Yes I guess it is a matter of how we use specific words like "know." 

Some religious people say they know things to be true, as if they are indistinguishable from fact, when it can be proven not to be true.  When presented with the information it is considered heresy and  punishable by death (depending upon the place and time).  The only "proof" required, is faith.  As I said trying to convince these people otherwise is a waste of time.

One of the best selling books on the list I'm working on now is, Adam! Where Are You?: Why Most Black Men Don't Go to Church.  I believe that is one reason why (my opinion I have not read the book) brother don;t go to church.

Now this is not to say there is no God.  I science can never prove the existence of God despite what people believe.

Merriam-Webster define "know" as the following:

Definition of know

It seems my use of the word "Know" was not exactly correct based upon the definition of the word.  There is no implication that what one knows has to be factual or true.  You can know things that can't be proven, or that are even patently false.

So some people can know God exists, other can know God does not exist, and many of have probably never really thought very deeply on the subject...

One's beliefs are what they know. Mine are always open to change as I acquire more information. Too often I assume other people are open to change in the same way--most are not... In fact they will take science and twist it for their own purposes.

Some Christians believe that climate change and the extreme weather events it creates, the raise of 45, and the strife in the Middle East are signs that the End Times are upon us.... hmm maybe they are onto something.

Anyone can do it.  All blogging platforms provide an RSS feed, which was a simple but brilliant tool to help people, on the web, create their own news feed for consuming content over the web.  Sadly we have given that responsibility over to social media...

Again you can setup your blog up to do this too.  But I did this so long ago I'd have to research up I set it up.

Oh and Amazon have so many list for ranks that they are all together meaningless, but as with the reviews people are still swayed by them.  

My blog is available a bazillion different ways and one of the is the Kindle.  In advance of the of Amazon boycott--which is many months out, would you all rate or provide a review of the Kindle version of my Blog: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B005FCX4VA/ref=nosim?tag=aalbccom-20

It will be interesting to see what impact it has if any.  Of course I'll report any impact I observe.

OK I'll concede the point; for I have no way of proving your fridge is in your kitchen if you are not looking at it, for the very act of making the observation is what places it there...

At any rate, the are those who play fast and lose with science to delude people for the purposes of taking their money from their money.  I'm not saying Neale is one of these people--I never heard of him.  But this is really the foundation of my point..

I'm not so sure quantum mechanics is popular Mel.  Sure I saw Particle Fever---in the theater, but is was not highly watched, earning less than $900K at the box office in limited release. Outside of this forum I don't talk to anyone else about it.  Though whenever I teach young people I usually bring it up.  Because the subject is a 100+ years old and I was never introduced to it in school

I did subsequently read the report there was nothing it to substantiate Neale's statement. 

@Mel Hopkins you nailed the difference between scientists and what I called new agey folk.  New Agey folk are perfectly comfortable relating what they know.  Scientist relate what they can prove.  Obviously there is a big difference.

When a scientist believes something that is later proven wrong, they will dispense with the discredited idea and move on with the new one.  For example, a scientist would not embrace astrology as scientific fact, because it has not been proven (it may have even been disproven), but an astrologer will believe in it because it is what they "know," scientific proof is irrelevant.  Christian fundamentalist refuse to believe in evolution or the age of the universe, despite their world view being proven wrong.. Again facts don't matter.

Again the problem I have with new agey folks is their misappropriation of science to further their means--especially the ones who do this to enrich themselves at the expense of others.

I'm trying to learn not to waste time arguing with people about what they think they know (believe) once I tell them what has been proven.

Now if people want to speculate about things that are unknowable (impossible to prove), like what was before the creation of our universe then I'm game 

Now I could very easily see a 45 supporter using Neale's statement to support "alternative facts."  Science tells us that we all see a "different truth," and of course some truths (facts) are better than others.

I did not look at the article but based upon your description I'm familiar with the effect.  Indeed I described a variation of this with the double slit experiment I described above. I described it as "famed," but I guess it really is not that well known because I doubt most people have much interest or knowledge of quantum physics.

But again electrons are quantum particles and the objects that we can see do not behave the same way--at least no one has proven this.  Of course this does not stop the new agey folks from suggest this to be true...

We know for example that electrons can be in two places at the same time.  Some even believe there other universes for this reason!  But this is not something we can observe.

I dunno about the Amazon reviews Mel. 

I have published a few reviews on Amazon myself, but these are excerpts from the full reviews here on AALBC.com.  I do it if the author request but not as a matter of course, because Amazon does not allow hyperlinks to external websites. So I can vouch for my reviews--but as far as the rest of ones on Amazon I take them with a grain of salt.

Unless it is a trusted entity I do not trust random reviews written by unknown people on any site--not just Amazon.  We know people pay for favorable reviews. We know people get fiends to write them. We also know that people even write negative reviews just to hurt another authors. Even the verified purchase reviews are gamed by slick marketers. 

The notion that we can get valuable information provided for free, like a professional written review of a book, is something that corporations take advantage of.  But whenever there is a free, or low cost way, to influence public option on a large platform, that platform is prime territory to be exploited this includes Amazon, Wikipedia, Facebook, and even Google's search results. Amazon and Facebook do very little to clean this up because reviews even bogus ones drive traffic.

I completely ignore reviews on Amazon for this reason. I read reviews written by professionals, unfortunately for Black books this means I'm not reading too many reviews of our books. 

But I completely understand than many people do read the review--which again is why they are gamed.

There is a mechanism on this site informal reader reviews of every book on the website site.  Here is the one of you books @Mel Hopkins: https://aalbc.com/books/home.php?isbn13=9781411673144#comment The is a link prompting reader to leave commesnt, but I get less than a handful of these a day.  When I see on I like I sometimes shre them on social media.

I have decided to focus on more formal process for identifying good books professional reviews, word of mouth from industry pros, and information I find on these discussion forums.  You probably noticed the book review requests that are posted here.  I look at each one but the benefit is that it is now a permanent part of the website, and other people will see it. 

@Faith U, yeah book clubs can certainly help word of mouth I have over 700 book clubs in my database: https://aalbc.com/bookclubs/ I could simply publish a list but I'm trying to reduce the number of authors that just blast the email addresses with unsolicited pitches to read their book.  Most book clubs do not select their books in this fashion anyway--unless that author has a track record.

The following was shared by @Wendy Jones on the the page where I posted the results of the survey of the question; would you stop buying book from Amazon's bookstore to save the book industry?

Where to begin. Well, first I'll answer the question Troy posed to me then I will attempt to answer some of the points made by the people who don't think it's a good idea to boycott Amazon.

How did I decide to write a letter to the CEO resigning from being an Amazon purchaser? Here is one of the articles I read. This one deals with inhuman treatment of workers:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/amazon-devastating-expose-accuses-internet-retailer-of-oppressive-and-callous-attitude-to-staff-10458159.html

I also read an expose in Mother Jones by an undercover investigative reporter. Here it is:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/mac-mcclelland-free-online-shipping-warehouses-labor/

There is a third article, which I will continue looking for, in which British people came to the US to work for Amazon and were worked without pay, that is enslaved.

As much as possible, I avoid supporting enslavement or sweatshop working conditions, though I know I am not completely successful. For instance, Goodreads, which I am on as a reader and a writer is owned by Amazon, but--I am told-- not yet managed by them.

Now, about the book business. I am a writer and the owner of a small press. New to the book business, but not new in hearing about certain aspects of it, I do research and talk to my fellow writers and the people who worked on the book Ida Bell Publishing, LLC just published.

I will do my best to deal with the objections to a boycott.

1) Low Cost Books:

As someone who reads about a book a week, I can understand that very few avid readers can afford full price books. That is why I have been a lifelong user of the public library system. Maybe my experience in New Jersey is unique, but I can get any book or movie that I want through my local library. My local library just joined a consortium--a group of libraries in the area that share books-- that nearly eliminates the need for interlibrary loan. Books have shown up in a few days, so far always less than a week.  

Some books are must haves either for yourself or for friends. For discount books, I have used Alibris.com successfully. The Strand.com is no longer that useful. There are others, which I am sure you know and listed in your comments.  

The Amazon pattern is an old one. Look up the history of  Standard Oil. Same tune, different lyrics. 

Venture capitalists invest in Amazon so they can afford to take a loss and put their profits into buying up Whole Foods and building brick and mortar bookstores--which they had previously said were outdated. They will probably go employee-free in both instances and put in scanners and robots. Once every competitor in a particular industry has gone bankrupt, they will then raise the prices to whatever level they want. Since they will be the only game in town, you will pay their price or do without.

If we don't do something to stop this now, we will only have ourselves to blame.

2) Self-Published Authors

This argument I have heard from the folks at Independent Book Publishers Association. I am sure I am not understanding the whole picture, so would my fellow writer please explain it to me? 

I used "The Complete Guide to Self-Publishing" by Sue Collier and Marilyn Ross as my main reference and branched off from there. I saw that there were now many different avenues to getting past the gatekeeper agents and publishers. 

I looked at the subsidy publishers, but to me they were still middle people that I wanted to avoid, but I know other writers who have used them. I know CreateSpace is owned by Amazon, but I don't think Lightening Spark or Hudson Press (I know a writer who had a terrible experience there) or any of the others are.  Also there was the Print On Demand option (which seemed too expensive to me).

Anyway, let's say you used one of the non-Amazon subsidy publishers, why would you have to place your book on the Amazon platform? Couldn't you have a website and look for the readers of your particular kind of book in their specialty groups? The food lovers who read the cooking blogs and the mystery readers in their various clubs online and off. 

My point is this, even if Amazon wasn't (a good deal today is not going to be a good deal tomorrow) 

Take a look at this article: http://articles.ibpa-online.org/article/breaking-up-with-amazon/ cheating writers an d publishers, the place is too crowded. If I am selling on Times Square along with the other 5,000 vendors how will I stand out? 

But if I go in search of the people who are especially interested in my handcrafted, wooden toys and set up on a side street, I'll have more success. 

So, assuming you are not using CreateSpace (you could always use another subsidy publisher) why do you need Amazon?

Please tell me what I'm missing?

The only choice left to me was to set up my own version of Hogarth Press (now owned by one of the Big Five traditional publishers), the press set up by Virgina and Leonard Woolf to publish their friends in the Bloomsbury group. Did I want to start another business, a publishing business at that? 

No, but it was the only way I could get past agents and publishers asking me why I was writing a book in my mother's voice (they wanted it in mine) about a black woman who wasn't famous (what she achieved in her life despite obstacles would help other people in her situation) and why did it have all this African American history in it (an African American woman born in 1920 who becomes the first black woman in management at a Fortune 500 company as well as a Harlem activist needs to be shown in a historical context) ?

So yes, fellow writer, I understand about the gatekeepers. I would never knowingly do anything to harm a fellow writer's chances. 

Oh, and I understand that readers will have to be in the front of this fight. If we writers start talking about Amazon, no one will give us the time to talk about our books. This is the fine advice I received from my former publicist. 

I'll wait for your reply, but won't be responding tonight.

Exactly!

That is another important point Mel.  Amazon authors always gloss over the fact that they are making less money per book that they would if the sold via virtually any other platform--including their own.

Booksellers who sell through Amazon make less money too.  I get paid based upon the sale price of the book I sold a lot of sub-$2 books this period.  Commissions of a $0.99 book are negligible--even if I sell a lot of them.

Also 1/3 of my sales for the last two months were reduced priced books sold by third parties on Amazon--I'm sure the authors don't see royalties on any these sales since many of the books second hand and of course my commission are much less.

Since my per book sales are much less, I actually make less money selling books despite record traffic.  My only recourse would be to sell directly or through other channels, but that brings us back to the same problem--people are conditioned to only buy from Amazon.

Now if all authors sold their own books or made their books available someplace other than Amazon I could direct readers to those alternative places.  

Sorry to read that Amazon may have stiffed you on those commissions.  @Mel Hopkins If you buy your own on Amazon do you earn a commission and royalty for that sale?

And another thing....

"I Sell More Books Through Amazon than Any Other Platform"
Many authors are wrestling with the decision to give Amazon exclusivity for their eBooks. Many others have already done it.  Some of the strongest criticism I've encountered regarding my proposed boycott of Amazon's bookstore is from authors who have given Amazon exclusivity for their ebooks.  The are complaining that a boycott would eliminate all of their revenue.

Now image any other retailer demanding exclusively on a product they did not create themselves. Why would anyone limit their product to one store? And how does one store wield so much power that author do it?  The answer is simple Amazon is a monopoly for ebooks.

Authors who commit to Amazon are happy to say they they sell more ebooks on Amazon than Apple, B&N, Kobo and Smashwords combined.  Of course they do, but again that is because Amazon owns the ebook space.  Of course none of these authors appreciate that if eBooks format was universal and could be viewed on any platform and could be purchased at any store--they would be able to sell more books and would not be beholden to a single company.

But again this will not happen because Amazon controls the software, hardware, and distribution platforms for ebooks.  They set the terms and either you deal with Amazon or you don't sell very many ebooks--if any.