ROBERT JAMES BIDINOTTO

CLIMATEGATE 2.0 -- the global-warming scandal continues

2011-11-26T13:09:00.000-05:00

5,000 newly leaked emails reveal that "scientists DID collude with government officials to hide research that didn't fit their apocalyptic global warming...deleted evidence that cast doubt on claims climate change was man-made...[and] were under orders from US and UK officials to come up with a 'strong message'"

Connect this with the previous post about leading climate alarmist Dr. James Hansen of NASA, who has become rich and famous by spreading this hysteria, and you'll see exactly what this 20-plus-year scam has been all about.

James Hansen and the corruption of science

2011-11-21T16:51:00.002-05:00

Al Gore isn't the only environmentalist to have made a bundle on climate alarmism. So has his "science" adviser, Dr. James Hansen.

Hansen is the taxpayer-funded NASA scientist who (1) initiated the global-warming scare in hyperbolic congressional testimony in 1988, (2) claimed that President Bush was trying to "muzzle" him (even while he was conducting more media interviews than any government "scientist"), and (3) actually advocated prosecution of businessmen for advocating contrary views ("deniers," he called them), for "crimes against nature." Can't let a pesky little nuisance like the First Amendment get in the way of a good scare campaign, now, can we?

Well, it turns out that the self-righteous-but-ethically-challenged Dr. Hansen sports an $8,000 Rolex and somehow "forgot" to report $1.6 million in income to the IRS. So, despite his denunciations of capitalism for despoiling the environment, it seems that he's found big money to be had from the taxpayers in government jobs that purvey panic. Just as there has been vast wealth for his political stooge, Mr. Gore. Both enjoy the good life, wining and dining at climate conferences around the world, and traveling in cushy limos and private jets, while chiding the rest of us for leaving behind "carbon footprints."

Inmates harass victims via Facebook

2011-11-21T12:17:00.000-05:00

NEWS STORIES THAT PROVOKE ME TO WRITE VIGILANTE NOVELS, #12,576 of a series:

"Inmates harass victims via Facebook"

How? By using smart phones smuggled into prison to allow them to connect to the internet and establish accounts on Facebook.

And their "punishment" for these direct coercive threats against their victims? Not longer prison terms tacked onto their sentences. No, instead, they only have a few weeks cut from their early-release credits. "Early release" from prison has thus become the norm for inmates -- just another welfare-state "entitlement."

Anyone still think that in HUNTER I was exaggerating how corrupt and anemic the criminal "justice" system has become?

College scholarships...for murderers

2011-11-18T02:21:00.000-05:00

Just when you think you have seen and heard it all, you find yet another example of the moral inversion that is destroying our culture.

Bruce Reilly, a first-year at Tulane [University’s School of Law in New Orleans] ... had pled guilty to second-degree murder and robbery and served 12 years in prison. When he was 20 years old, Reilly beat and stabbed to death a 58-year old English professor at Community College of Rhode island, capping off his crime by stealing the professor’s car, wallet, and credit cards. In short, he is a felon....

The fact that Reilly is an admitted student in Tulane’s law school should be at least curious and potentially worrisome to the students, alumni and supporters of that school. The Louisiana Bar, like all other states, requires proof of good moral character and fitness to be admitted to the bar, a requirement that almost always excludes felons – particularly those who have been convicted of a violent crime as heinous as Reilly’s. (The fact that he is out of prison after only 12 years when he murdered and robbed an older college professor doesn’t say a lot for Rhode Island’s criminal justice system, either.) It is next to impossible for him to become a licensed attorney even if he graduates, as Tulane University officials must surely know.

As at least one student complained to The Times-Picayune, Reilly is taking up “another’s space in the law school even though he may never be able to practice as a lawyer because of his conviction.” But it gets worse.

Reilly is attending Tulane on an NAACP scholarship and a Dean’s Merit Scholarship. The NAACP has made it very clear in its public statements and its litigation that it believes that the constitutional right of states under the Fourteenth Amendment to take away the right of felons to vote is “discriminatory” and “undermines the most fundamental aspect of American citizenship” (which the NAACP apparently thinks means being able to murder and vote at the same time).

As the hero said in my thriller HUNTER, correcting Edmund Burke:

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is an enabler."

White House sniper: just another "minor offender"

2011-11-16T11:26:00.000-05:00

ABC News about Oscar Ramiro Ortega, being hunted for sniping at the White House: "Ortega has an extensive record, ranging from domestic violence to drug charges." And: "U.S. Park police say Ortega may have spent time blending in with Occupy D.C. protesters."

Yeah, he'd clearly fit right in with that crowd.

The Examiner: "Ortega's criminal history in Idaho, Texas and Utah includes arrests for assault of a law enforcement officer, marijuana possession and being a minor in possession of alcohol." Yet, despite this criminal history, and even though he was picked up for questioning by cops hours before this sniping incident, they let him go.

There you have it: just another "minor offender" being "treated" with "alternatives to incarceration" so that he could be "managed outside an institutional setting." Your criminal justice system at work, folks.

News stories that make me write vigilante thrillers

2011-11-13T00:25:00.000-05:00

Get a load of this news story. Then come back here and read the rest of this post.

Got that?

Now, please: Never, ever say that in my thriller HUNTER I exaggerated or misrepresented the appalling level and number of moral inversions that occur daily within our alleged "criminal justice system."

Combine this case with the systematic "enabling" that allowed a child-molesting predator to continue committing atrocities against little boys for years at Penn State University, even after his rapes had been eye-witnessed at least twice, and we see a society that has completely lost its moral bearings.

The cause? A single premise: that individuals are not responsible for what they do -- that they are helpless "victims" of circumstances beyond their control.

From Freud to Rawls to the pulpits to the classrooms, a vast Excuse-Making Industry of intellectuals has persuaded millions that criminals are mere "victims" of circumstance; that the only real crime, therefore, is punishing them for actions that they "couldn't help" -- or even daring to pronounce a negative moral judgment about them, or anything; and that the primary purpose of government is not to protect people from predators, but to redistribute the "lucky" fruits of some people's success to those who were too "unlucky" to get their "fair share," from whatever mysterious source that goods and services and happiness are supposed to magically materialize.

The unrelenting, ubiquitous war on the principle of personal self-responsibility has led to widespread moral intimidation and cultural paralysis, even in the face of brazen degeneracy. Consider just a few recent examples:

* the unwillingness of politicians to clear city streets and parks of "Occupy Wall Street" vandals, thieves, rapists, thugs, and bums, no matter what crimes they openly commit, while police are ordered to stand in passive witness of their offenses;

* the mute confusion and anguished indecision of at least two eyewitnesses and countless college bureaucrats to the Penn State predator's rapes of terrified, helpless little boys;

* the linked news article in this post, which documents once again how our misnamed "justice system" simply can't recycle career predators back onto the streets fast enough or often enough.

If your knee-jerk response to this angry post is indignation over my words, rather than over the unspeakable atrocities that provoke them, then you've imbibed the same toxic premise that is killing our civilization: the premise that the only real "evils" are anyone's demands for self-responsibility, and any moral judgments that proceed from that insistence.

And as you look around our nation and the world at the rise of savage mob rule, tribal piracy on the open seas, and terrorist thuggery everywhere, you need find the cause of it all at no greater distance than your route to the nearest mirror.

The Environmental Perils of Going "Organic"

2011-11-10T16:24:00.000-05:00

We are constantly subjected to environmentalist scare campaigns -- none so common or terrifying as those directed against the use of pesticides and herbicides on our crops. These, it is argued, represent an environmental and health menace.

But what would happen to the environment if we banned pesticides and all tried to live on "organic" crops?

An expert explains the facts of life...literally. Those long under the sway of the environmentalist Narrative might find the claims disconcerting. But check them out for yourself.

Behind the "dying polar bears" eco-scare is...

2011-10-31T17:01:00.000-04:00

...yet another scam by environmentalists. Don Surber comments: "So we have an expert on birds guessing that white blobs on a photo are drowned polar bears. That’s it. That’s the science."

Yet from this "science," from one non-expert guessing what's in a photo, comes national policy decisions that are destined to cost billions upon billions of dollars and countless jobs.

Welcome to the Brave Green World.

"Occupy Wall Street" activists ARE the world's richest one percent

2011-10-30T08:38:00.000-04:00

Yes, you read that correctly: Most of the Occupy Wall Street activists -- who scream indignantly about income inequality, and who want confiscatory taxes imposed on the "wealthiest one percent" -- are themselves among the world's wealthiest one percent:

In America, the top 1% earn more than $380,000 per year. We are, however, among the richest nations on Earth. How much do you need to earn to be among the top 1% of the world?

$34,000.

That was the finding World Bank economist Branko Milanovic presented in his 2010 book The Haves and the Have-Nots. Going down the distribution ladder may be just as surprising. To be in the top half of the globe, you need to earn just $1,225 a year. For the top 20%, it's $5,000 per year. Enter the top 10% with $12,000 a year. To be included in the top 0.1% requires an annual income of $70,000....

The global distribution figures may seem incomprehensibly low, but consider a couple of statistics you're likely familiar with: According to the U.N., "Nearly half the world's population, 2.8 billion people, earn less than $2 a day." According to the World Bank, 95% of those living in the developing world earn less than $10 a day.

Those numbers are so shocking that you might only think about them in the abstract. But when you consider them in the context of the entire globe, including yourself, the skewing effects they have on the distribution of income is simply massive. It means that Americans we consider poor are among some of the world's most well-off. As Milanovic notes, "the poorest [5%] of Americans are better off than more than two-thirds of the world population." Furthermore, "only about 3 percent of the Indian population have incomes higher than the bottom (the very poorest) U.S. percentile."

In short, most of those protesting in the Occupy Wall Street movement would be considered wealthy -- perhaps extraordinarily wealthy -- by much of the world. Many of those protesting the 1% are, ironically, the 1%.

Now, I wonder how many of the protestors would be eager to have their own incomes and property confiscated in order to "level" income disparities with the rest of the world? Think they'd like to live in the "equality" of, say, $3 per day incomes?

Muslim alternative to capitalistic interest payments: insolvency

2011-10-19T14:27:00.001-04:00

Okay, here's my belly laugh of the day:"Sharia-compliant mortgage lender in receivership":

UM Financial was one of the first companies in Canada to offer so-called Islamic financing to Muslims who believe that sharia, or Islamic law, prohibitions against usury include interest on things such as mortgages.

UM would buy a property then lease it to a client so they were paying rent instead of interest. Some homeowners complained that the firm would also charge extra fees.

The company had $50 million in financial backing from Central 1 Credit Union of which almost $29 million is outstanding.

Qayum Mian knew he was paying a premium on his Markham house for the seven years he used UM Financial — he estimated up to 2 percentage points more than if he’d gone through a bank — but was happy to pay the price “because my conscience was satisfied.”

"Occupy Wall Street" does NOT represent the American middle class

2011-10-18T21:19:00.000-04:00

Democrat pollster Doug Schoen explodes the Democrat/progressive Narrative about the "Occupy Wall Street" gang. It's a wishful-thinking-based storyline (promoted by the liberal media) that casts the demonstrators as righteously aggrieved "victims" of capitalism, who represent the views of "99 percent" of Americans and their aspirations. Reports Schoen:

Our findings probably represent the first systematic random sample of Occupy Wall Street opinion.

Our research shows clearly that the movement doesn't represent unemployed America and is not ideologically diverse. Rather, it comprises an unrepresentative segment of the electorate that believes in radical redistribution of wealth, civil disobedience and, in some instances, violence. Half (52%) have participated in a political movement before, virtually all (98%) say they would support civil disobedience to achieve their goals, and nearly one-third (31%) would support violence to advance their agenda.

The vast majority of demonstrators are actually employed, and the proportion of protesters unemployed (15%) is within single digits of the national unemployment rate (9.1%)....

What binds a large majority of the protesters together—regardless of age, socioeconomic status or education—is a deep commitment to left-wing policies: opposition to free-market capitalism and support for radical redistribution of wealth, intense regulation of the private sector, and protectionist policies to keep American jobs from going overseas.

Sixty-five percent say that government has a moral responsibility to guarantee all citizens access to affordable health care, a college education, and a secure retirement—no matter the cost. By a large margin (77%-22%), they support raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans, but 58% oppose raising taxes for everybody, with only 36% in favor. And by a close margin, protesters are divided on whether the bank bailouts were necessary (49%) or unnecessary (51%).

Thus Occupy Wall Street is a group of engaged progressives who are disillusioned with the capitalist system and have a distinct activist orientation. Among the general public, by contrast, 41% of Americans self-identify as conservative, 36% as moderate, and only 21% as liberal. That's why the Obama-Pelosi embrace of the movement could prove catastrophic for their party.

Team Obama and their willing media accomplices are such prisoners of the leftist Narrative that many actually believe that these street agitators and social misfits reflect the demographics of Middle America. We can only hope that continue to drink this Kool-Aid until November 2012.

"Public education" in the Age of Equality

2011-10-10T12:18:00.000-04:00

I don't really think that I need to comment on this.

Except to say that, in the Age of Egalitarianism -- which is what our president and his party are all about -- not only can you be "too big to fail," you can be "too incompetent to fail," also.

"Pathological Altruism"

2011-10-05T09:22:00.000-04:00

Well, I haven't read this book yet, but it has been getting plenty of MSM buzz, including from the New York Times.

But I'm confused. Didn't Ayn Rand first make this an issue, oh, around 1943, in The Fountainhead?

And isn't she still being denounced and mocked for it, to this very day?

Why is it that a truth isn't a truth unless it's "discovered" and propagated by a gang of Establishment academics?

A personal message from Vince Flynn

2011-10-04T21:09:00.002-04:00

I just received by email a copy of this personal message from bestselling thriller author Vince Flynn. It speaks for itself.

I had the honor of interviewing Vince a few years ago (and I’ll be re-posting that interview on my “Vigilante Author” blog soon). In addition to being a great writer, he is one of the most personable and principled men I know.

I know all of you will wish this wonderful man a full and speedy recovery as he continues his gallant battle with cancer.

My fiction site: "The Vigilante Author"

2011-10-04T09:21:00.000-04:00

Just a reminder:

Anyone looking for posts about fiction, self-publishing, and my own novel HUNTER: A Thriller, should visit my separate blog, "The Vigilante Author." My latest two posts there (late Sept./early Oct.) contain my extensive list of "The Best Thriller Writers -- Ever."

EPA thugs use fake "wetlands" charges to bully Idaho couple

2011-10-02T18:12:00.000-04:00

Check out this video.

These poor people -- trying to build a home on obviously bone-dry land that the EPA has arbitrarily, ex post facto declared to be a "wetland" -- face the loss of their property plus noncompliance fines of $30,000 per day.

Fortunately, they have the wonderful Pacific Legal Foundation on their side, on a battle headed to the Supreme Court. But countless other victims of environmentalist bullies, within government and without, don't have a champion. Hmm... maybe they could use the help of a vigilante....

Those Diabolically Clever Racist Republicans!

2011-09-29T14:12:00.001-04:00

DIABOLICALLY CLEVER RACIST REPUBLICANS HIDE THEIR RACISM BY SUPPORTING BLACK CANDIDATE HERMAN CAIN.

Thus reasons that brilliantly incisive political pundit Janeane Garofalo.

Of course, if Republicans supported a white candidate, instead...why, they'd be RACISTS.

"Attila and the Witch Doctor" in Venezuela

2011-09-12T01:19:00.000-04:00

Readers of Ayn Rand's For the New Intellectual will recognize these archetypes, what she described as a symbiotic relationship between "mystics of muscle" and "mystics of mind." And they'll also grasp how it relates to the following amusing news story:

Shamans from tribes in Venezuela's Amazon jungle held a ceremony at the Miraflores presidential palace Saturday to help Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez recover from his cancer treatment.

Chavez, who insists that he was "not sick but recovering" from cancer, greeted the shamans wearing a track suit in the colors of the Venezuelan national flag and wore a crown of feathers the visitors gave him.

Members of the Yekuana, Jivi and Wayuu communities danced, sang and prayed as they invoked their ancestors to protect the Venezuelan leader.

The ritual was aimed at protecting Chavez "against enemies and bad health," said Miguel Morales, a shaman from the Jivi community.

It also serves "so that he is left in peace, politically," he said.

I just couldn't make this stuff up.

A 9/11 commentary: "Unilateral Moral Disarmament"

2011-09-11T09:48:00.000-04:00

Not long after the attacks of September 11, 2001, I wrote a commentary on the meaning and source of the attack for a magazine called Navigator.

Nothing in the intervening ten years has caused me to alter my fundamental analysis of the ideas at the root of the assault on America. As we contemplate the tragic losses of human life from that infamous day, and the philosophy at the heart of the attack, I thought I'd share with you that commentary:

"Unilateral Moral Disarmament."

An unsurprising political fall

2011-09-10T01:35:00.000-04:00

Way back in 1978, I met the former Margaret Kelley, a young woman running a quixotic campaign for state representative as a Republican in the Democratic stronghold of downtown Boston. I was impressed enough to volunteer to become her campaign manager, and also personally smitten enough to later become her husband. (We raised a daughter together before separating and divorcing in the mid-1990s).

Margaret was running against another political newbie, a Democratic lawyer from Boston's Italian North End neighborhood by the name of Salvatore DiMasi. He struck us at the time as a terminally ambitious young man on the make, too slick to be scrupulous (as he demonstrated in several ways during the campaign). In other words, a typical creature of Boston machine politics.

We gave it a gallant shot, even took a couple of precincts away from him in the election. But the gerrymandered votes were heavily stacked in the North End, where against a name like "DiMasi," the name "Kelley" didn't have the odds of a pizza slice's survival in an Italian sports bar. We were out-registered Democrat to Republican something like 13-1; we lost about 2 to 1; for us, that was a moral victory.

In the intervening years, Sal DiMasi rose like scum to the top of a stagnant pond, up through the ranks of Massachusetts politicos eventually to become the Speaker of the state House of Representatives -- in short, one of the most powerful politicians in the Commonwealth. He did it the old-fashioned way for a Boston Democrat: by a combination of cronyism, corruption, and outright criminality.

It all caught up with him in 2009 when the Boston Globe exposed his sordid machinations. Sal DiMasi has just been sentenced to eight years in federal prison "for steering millions of dollars in state contracts to a software company and secretly profiting from the scheme."

I saw this guy's lack of scruples first-hand in 1978, so this news comes as no surprise to me now. I do find it dispiriting that so many voters expect this sort of behavior as the norm -- even as desirable -- from their politicians. So, before we dismiss the memory of Mr. DiMasi with indifferent contempt, perhaps we should ponder the words of the guy who once said: "Politicians, like water, cannot rise higher than their source."

Steyn on "The Desperation-Deprivation Myth"

2011-08-30T00:26:00.003-04:00

Mark Steyn, who tops my list of favorite political/cultural commentators, once again hits it out of the park with a column that blasts the lame excuse-making for the recent British riots. In part:

In fact, these feral youth live better than 90 percent of the population of the planet. They certainly live better than their fellow youths halfway around the world who go to work each day in factories across China and India to make the cool electronic toys young Westerners expect to enjoy as their birthright. In Britain, as in America and Europe, the young take it for granted that this agreeable division of responsibilities is as permanent a feature of life as the earth and sky: Rajiv and Suresh in Bangalore make the state-of-the-art gizmo, Kevin and Ron in Birmingham get to play with it. That’s just the way it is. And, because that’s the way it is, Kevin and Ron and the welfare state that attends their every need assume ’twill always be so.

To justify their looting, the looters appealed to the conventional desperation-of-deprivation narrative: They’d “do anything to get more money.” Anything, that is, except get up in the morning, put on a clean shirt, and go off to do a day’s work. That concept is all but unknown to the homes in which these guys were raised....

The problem for the Western world is that it has incentivized non-productivity on an industrial scale. For large numbers at the lower end of the spectrum (still quaintly referred to by British reporters as “working class”), the ritual of work — of lifetime employment as a normal feature of life — has been all but bred out by multigenerational dependency. At the upper end of the spectrum, too many of us seem to regard an advanced Western society as the geopolitical version of a lavishly endowed charitable foundation that funds somnolent programming on NPR.

As is always mandatory when it comes to a Mark Steyn piece, read it all.

UPDATE: Related: Eminent criminologist and scholar James Q. Wilson demolishes the notion that unemployment and bad economic times lead to an increase in crime:

But the notion that unemployment causes crime runs into some obvious difficulties. For one thing, the 1960s, a period of rising crime, had essentially the same unemployment rate as the late 1990s and early 2000s, a period when crime fell. Further, during the Great Depression, when unemployment hit 25 percent, the crime rate in many cities went down....

[And] when the recent recession struck...[and] as the national unemployment rate doubled from around 5 percent to nearly 10 percent, the property-crime rate, far from spiking, fell significantly. For 2009, the FBI reported an 8 percent drop in the nationwide robbery rate and a 17 percent reduction in the auto-theft rate from the previous year. Big-city reports show the same thing. Between 2008 and 2010, New York City experienced a 4 percent decline in the robbery rate and a 10 percent fall in the burglary rate. Boston, Chicago, and Los Angeles witnessed similar declines. The FBI’s latest numbers, for 2010, show that the national crime rate fell again....

Some scholars argue that the unemployment rate is too crude a measure of economic frustration to prove the connection between unemployment and crime, since it estimates only the percentage of the labor force that is looking for work and hasn’t found it. But other economic indicators tell much the same story.... So we have little reason to ascribe the recent crime decline to jobs, the labor market, or consumer sentiment.

A new blog launched: THE VIGILANTE AUTHOR

2011-08-19T09:55:00.001-04:00

I'd like to invite you to my new blog, focused entirely on fiction -- especially my own -- and self-publishing: THE VIGILANTE AUTHOR.

For quite some time, I've been uncomfortable with this multiple-purpose blog. It has tried to address two largely distinct audiences: people interested in my discussions of politics, culture, and philosophy, and people interested in fiction and self-publishing. Many readers eager to read about the former won't want to be harangued about the latter -- and vice-versa.

For that reason, I've decided to launch THE VIGILANTE AUTHOR as a site dedicated to the fiction/self-publishing topic areas, while this blog will sharpen its focus entirely to comments and observations about socio-political topics.

I'll eliminate a number of links on the right margin of this site that pertain to fiction/self-publishing matters. If that's what interests you most, head on over to THE VIGILANTE AUTHOR.

If hard-hitting commentary about the passing scene is what interests you most, though, stay put, kick off your shoes, and feel free to chime in here.

I'm interviewed by blogger Rich Engle about "HUNTER"

2011-08-17T23:04:00.001-04:00

Those interested in learning a bit more about me, my writing methods, the public response to HUNTER, and the role that my philosophical views played in the novel, are invited to read the interview just posted by Rich Engle on his blog.

Thanks, Rich, for asking some questions that other interviewers won't.

"HUNTER" ranked #1 by customers on 3 Kindle lists

2011-08-15T11:25:00.009-04:00

As of August 15, there are posted a whopping 45 "5-star" Amazon customer reviews for HUNTER; there is also one lone "4-star" review. Because of these stellar buyer ratings, my debut thriller now stands at #1 on three Kindle "Top Rated" lists: "Thrillers," "Romantic Suspense," and "Spy Stories & Tales of Intrigue."

Based on customer ratings, it also ranks #2 among all "Mysteries & Thrillers," #3 among all "Romance" titles, #7 in all "Genre Fiction," and #22 among ALL "Fiction" titles on the Kindle. Finally, among all 986,000+ Kindle ebooks -- both fiction and nonfiction -- HUNTER stands at #102.

Check out the new Amazon reviews here.

UPDATE: The first review from an actual book-review site, "Crime Fiction Lover," in Britain, gives 4 stars to the book, which it describes as "a tight, slick spy thriller" with "engaging characters":

There are convincing details of weapons, combat, information gathering, information masking methods, and the technology that makes it all possible. While the author’s background is not in this area, the research done to provide a convincing image is obvious.... If you are a fan of slick espionage thrillers, and are looking to find something a little closer to home that carries a message with the story, this tale is for you.

UPDATE: I've posted a lot of new material at the Dylan Hunter Facebook Fan Page.

UPDATE, 8/16: HUNTER (8-16, 9 pm) has now entered the Kindle "Top 50 Bestsellers" in "Spy Stories & Tales of Intrigue," at #47. It also has reached #77 on the Kindle bestseller list in "Romantic Suspense." And it now appears on a third bestseller list, too: the broader Amazon.com bestseller list of "Romantic Suspense" titles, at #93, a list that includes many more titles than the Kindle ebook list.

In other words, the book's sales numbers are beginning to track more closely with the its stellar "customer ratings."

UPDATE, 8/17: Amazing -- the charts just continue to improve. I woke up checked at 9 am on 8-17 to find HUNTER with the following new low rankings on three "bestseller" charts: #45 bestseller in "Spy Stories & Tales of Intrigue"; #67 in the Kindle Store's "Romantic Suspense"; and #79 on Amazon.com's broader "Romantic Suspense" list. Again, these are actual sales lists -- not customer-rating lists, which are even better.

UPDATE, 8/18 -- Today, HUNTER reached as low as #40 bestseller on the Kindle "Spy Stories & Tales of Intrigue" chart, and #56 on the "Romantic Suspense" list. It's overall ranking on the Kindle among all paid (rather than free) items descended to about #2000 out of over 969,000 products. HUNTER is now selling on the Kindle at a rate three times greater per day than it did during the first four days this month.

Investigation into publishers under-reporting ebook royalties

2011-08-10T11:28:00.000-04:00

There have been stories for some time that major publishers have been systematically under-reporting ebook royalties, and hence stiffing their authors the payments they've earned.

Now a law firm has launched an investigation. Here are the details.

Publishers terrified to compete with Amazon Publishing

2011-08-08T11:25:00.000-04:00

Publishers Weekly has begrudgingly acknowledged the obvious in an article titled "All Eyes on Amazon Publishing." After quoting a lot of grousing bookstore owners and nervous agents, the meat of the article -- which reveals the real concern of PW and its Big 6 clientele -- is to be found in the final two paragraphs:

For many agents, along with some booksellers, the real concern about Amazon Publishing has to do with what it could signal for traditional publishers. If Amazon lands enough bestselling authors, it could dominate traditional publishing the way it has come to monopolize online bookselling. Jeff McCord, owner of the Atlanta shop Bound to Be Read Books, thinks Amazon has long “wished to take over the book industry from top to bottom” and its recent foray into publishing is proof. “Amazon Publishing is a bigger worry for publishers than for bookstores,” he said.

While agents don’t want to see Amazon gain more control over any part of the business, they will go where they find the best deals. If Amazon is offering better royalty rates on both print and digital than many traditional houses—as some reports suggest—agents will be forced to do business with a company that, as one insider put it, “there is a lot of bad blood with.”

Translation: Publishers are scared out of their wits that Amazon is going to out-compete them for authors on the publishing end, just as booksellers are furious that Amazon's online and Kindle business has out-competed them on the retail end. Just you wait: It won't be long before all the dying dinosaurs try to get the government to crack down on this superb competitor with the bludgeon of antitrust" laws, instead of their own improvements in quality, author terms, and customer service.

Please donate to help the families of fallen Navy SEALS

2011-08-07T16:50:00.001-04:00

I'd be grateful if you'd consider making a donation to the Navy SEAL Foundation, to help the grieving families of the incredibly gallant members of SEAL Team 6 who died this week in Afghanistan.

I just donated and I hope that you will, too.

And I hope you'll repost this message and the link on your own blogs and social-networking sites.

Thank you.

I'm interviewed on "Kindle Author" about "HUNTER"

2011-08-07T12:38:00.004-04:00

I've just been interviewed by "KINDLE AUTHOR."

Here is stuff you may (or may not!) want to know about HUNTER, about its hero and its genesis, and about me.

Enjoy!

UPDATE, 8/7/11 1:30 pm.: Based on sales, HUNTER is currently (1:45 pm Sunday) the #56 ranked bestseller in Kindle "Spy Stories & Tales of Intrigue" and the #90 Kindle bestseller in "Romantic Suspense."

UPDATE, 8/9/11: Based on customer ratings, HUNTER is now the #26 "Top Rated in Fiction" -- that's ALL fiction -- on the Kindle, which includes over 286,000 titles. It's also #9 "Top Rated in Genre Fiction," #3 "Top Rated in Romance," #2 "Top Rated in Mysteries & Thrillers," and ...

#1 "Top Rated in Thrillers"
#1 "Top Rated in Spy Stories & Tales of Intrigue"
#1 "Top Rated in Romantic Suspense"

Thank YOU, dear readers, for this incredible response to my debut novel.

"HUNTER" hits an Amazon Top 100 Bestseller list

2011-08-03T19:46:00.007-04:00

On the afternoon of August 3 -- after just six weeks of release as a self-published novel -- HUNTER, my debut thriller, entered the Kindle Top 100 bestseller list in the "Spy Stories & Tales of Intrigue" category. As of 7:30 p.m. Eastern, it reached as low as #82, ahead of the following bestselling authors and titles on that list:

James Rollins ("The Judas Strain"), David Baldacci ("Absolute Power"), Clive Cussler ("Atlantis Found"), Tom Clancy ("The Teeth of the Tiger," "Patriot Games"), Jack du Brul, Ken Follett ("Lie Down with Lions"), Daniel Silva ("Mark of the Assassin," "The Marching Season"), Stephen Hunter ("Time to Hunt"), Robert B. Parker ("Night & Day: A Jesse Stone Novel"), Nelson DeMille ("The Charm School," "By the Rivers of Babylon"), William Gibson ("Pattern Recognition"), M.H. Sargent ("Operation Spider Web," "The Yemen Connection"), and Jack Higgins ("The Eye of the Storm").

Also today, HUNTER received its 40th Amazon customer review -- the 39th that rated it with "5 Stars," the highest possible ranking. As a result, the novel is now customer-ranked #1 on the Kindle list "Top Rated in Spy Stories & Tales of Intrigue," #1 "Top Rated in Romantic Suspense," #2 "Top Rated in Thrillers" (that's among all thrillers available on the Kindle), #4 "Top Rated in Mysteries & Thrillers," #8 #5* "Top Rated in Romance," ~~#19~~ #14* "Top Rated in Genre Fiction," and ~~#45~~ #40* "Top Rated in Fiction" (again, that's all fiction available on the Kindle, over 285,000 titles).

If you would've asked me even two months ago if this would have happened -- let alone so soon, and even for an hour -- I would've laughed in your face. Nonetheless, I'm grateful to my readers.

* These revised rankings as of 8/4/11.

UPDATE, 8/5/11 -- As of 10:45 a.m., HUNTER is down to #75 on Kindle's "Bestsellers in Spy Stories & Tales of Intrigue" list, another new low ranking. It's also well under the #5,000 ranking in sales of all Kindle titles -- #4,460, to be precise -- out of almost a million ebook titles. In addition, several online interviews with me and reviews of the book are pending, which will only accelerate sales.

UPDATE, 8/6/11 -- HUNTER sales ranking fell to as low as #60 on the "Spy Stories" bestseller list, and continues to hover in the low 60s. It's overall Kindle sales ranking is down to the low-to-mid 3,000s.

UPDATE, 8/15/11 -- HUNTER has fallen periodically to rankings as low as #55 on the "Spy Stories" bestseller list and has appeared repeatedly on the "Romantic Suspense" bestseller list, too.

Great advice for authors

2011-07-31T19:11:00.001-04:00

Within the past day or so, some of the smartest, most successful participants in "the Self-Publishing Revolution" have posted valuable advice for authors who are trying to navigate through the chaos of today's publishing world. I thought I'd post here a roundup of links.

Dean Wesley Smith -- a prolific author (widely published, both traditionally and independently) who writes an invaluable blog -- has just posted a brief summary: "The New World of Publishing: Traditional or Indie? What To Do Now." For writers facing the decision as to whether to continue seeking a traditional agent and publisher, or to self-publish, he offers this advice, in a nutshell:

Take everything you can take into your own control and hold on.

What does that mean exactly?

Write like crazy.

Then with what you have finished, spend the next two years indie publishing your own stuff, learning all the tricks of being an indie publisher, and getting your own trade paper books into bookstores.

Then when things settle down in traditional publishing, you will be ready and practiced and have some work to present to traditional publishers.

Read the entire blog for his reasoning and explanations.

Not convinced? Then you need to read veteran author David Farland on the basic math of publishing, summarized here by the "Passive Guy." This brief excerpt from David's post about the sobering odds and the financial facts of life in today's publishing world make it clear that to seek a traditional print publisher is an almost sure career-killer for an author.

Meanwhile, another widely published and highly successful author, Bob Mayer, has summarized his own experiences and advice in two valuable publications that every author should peruse. Bob's blog is another don't-miss daily resource.

But if traditional print publishing is heading into a chaotic and uncertain future, how can one take advantage of the emerging opportunities in "indie" or self-publishing? David Gaughran has compiled the experiences of nearly three dozen successful indie authors in his just-released book, Let's Get Digital: How to Self-Publish, and Why You Should. The book is getting advance raves and ought to be a first stop for authors contemplating their publishing options.

Follow those links, Dear Author, and you'll get a crash course in how to survive during the Self-Publishing Revolution.

An historic precedent to this "debt crisis" prescription

2011-07-28T10:07:00.000-04:00

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY: "Raising revenues" to solve the debt crisis reminds me of the Medieval practice of bleeding the patient to solve his health crisis.

Best reader review of HUNTER to date

2011-07-27T00:37:00.000-04:00

Wow.

This is the sort of review that an author dreams of receiving.

All I can say to the anonymous "UFO6" (and I honestly haven't a clue as to his or her identity) is: THANK YOU.

Newbie author: "Why I Turned Down Two Publishing Contracts"

2011-07-25T11:39:00.000-04:00

Travel writer Pamela Olson explains, in lucid detail, "Why I Turned Down Two Publishing Contracts."

For her (and for me, and for many, many others), indie publishing is a much better deal, on many counts. Olson summarizes the reasons about as concisely and persuasively as I've read anywhere.

Ebook sales surge, print sales in freefall

2011-07-24T11:24:00.001-04:00

Ebook sales are continuing their surge, while print sales are in freefall. On the heels of the Borders Books debacle, and reports of Barnes & Noble further cutting shelf space in their stores, it is not a good time to be in the mainstream publishing industry -- especially if you are a traditionally published author struggling for bookstore exposure and an income.

Month after month, the statistics and reports continue to add up to a picture of an industry in chaotic upheaval. But that doesn't mean that authors can't do well if they pursue independent publishing.

David Gaughran provides the latest lucid overview.

HUNTER is now the #1 top-rated Romantic Suspense novel on the Kindle!

2011-07-23T07:39:00.002-04:00

THIS MORNING, 7/23/2011, "HUNTER" IS THE #1 TOP-RATED "ROMANTIC SUSPENSE" NOVEL ON THE KINDLE LIST, based on customer reviews. 30 reader reviews, and 29 of them are "5 stars," while the other is "4 stars." And this is out of some 750,000+ novels offered on the Kindle.

Thank you, my dear readers, for this incredible honor.

HUNTER is now #2 in Kindle's "Top Rated in Romantic Suspense"

2011-07-21T11:02:00.001-04:00

Some new milestones for HUNTER this a.m. (7/21). The thriller has climbed to...

* #15 on the Amazon Kindle list of "Top Rated in Mysteries & Thrillers,"

* #14 in "Top Rated in Romance," and -- best of all --

* #2 in "Top Rated in Romantic Suspense."

This visibility is bringing the book to the attention of many new readers, and the sales trend line is moving up steadily.

UPDATE 7-22-11: I had my best sales day yet, fueled by a link from the mighty "Instapundit" Glenn Reynolds to the HUNTER Amazon sales page. At its best point today, HUNTER was ranked at #1,134 in overall Kindle ebook sales (out of over 750,000 titles), and #2,241 in print-book sales on Amazon (out of 8 million titles). It stood at #28 on the Kindle Bestseller List in "Romantic Suspense," and #31 on the Amazon Bestseller (print-book) List in the same category.

Borders' Fall -- and Fallout for Authors and Publishers

2011-07-21T08:30:00.001-04:00

Kristine Kathryn Rusch (whose discussions of the publishing business are invaluable) has just published a long post detailing the terrible ripple effects that the Borders Books closing will have on authors and publishers in the third quarter. Here's just a snippet:

...The remaining stores, all 399 of them, and the remaining employees, 10,700 of them, will be gone by September.... The main financial squeeze that Borders will cause to the publishers on already delivered material has already happened.... But the bigger problem with Borders’ liquidation is upcoming....

The problem is the decreased shelf space. Think it through, my reading friends. Suddenly 399 bookstores are vanishing, with no replacement in sight.... Here’s the problem beautifully stated on Twitter by Kathleen Schmidt, a book publicist: “Here is how the Borders closing will impact publishers: Say you have a bestselling author and you usually do a 1st printing of 100K books. Out of that 1st print of 100K, B&N/Amazon would take a large quantity, then Target, maybe Costco/BJs/Walmart, then Borders, then indies. If you’re an author with a 1st print of 30K (a lot), you prob don’t have price clubs or Target. You have B&N, Amazon, Borders, and indies. Now, take Borders OUT of the 1st print equation. Also consider that B&N is conservative with numbers these days. That 30K turns into 15K.”

I found this quote in a good analysis piece on NPR’s book blog. As Rachel Syme, the author of the blog, added, “Granted the reduced print runs for books doesn’t mean fewer books will sell, but Borders closing does have a huge effect on how many physical copies will be out in the world.... There is no other outlet big or solid enough to absorb the blow; there is nowhere else for all those paperbacks and hardcovers to go. The most logical thing to do is to stop printing them”....

...Those things, however, would be a blip on the publishing radar if it weren’t for something that is happening this month that most people in traditional publishing don’t even know about.

Barnes & Noble issued an order from its corporate headquarters that it wants its stores to once again decrease the number of paper books the stores are going to carry.... What this means is that in the third quarter, just as traditional publishers are absorbing and dealing with the last of the Borders blow from the winter, they will get hit with a massive number of returns from Barnes & Noble.

Add to this the ailing economy, and the confluence of these events means that the third and fourth quarters are likely to be disastrous for traditional publishers and their authors. They rely heavily on chain bookstores as their main public showcases. But a huge portion of the shelf space for books in those stores will vanish, almost overnight -- right in the middle of the economy's non-recovery.

As always, read the whole thing as Rusch -- one of the best-informed people in the book business -- looks ahead at the far-reaching implications and consequences for all of us who have an interest in the printed word.

Borders Books shutters its doors forever

2011-07-19T10:00:00.000-04:00

Mitch Albom laments the passing of Borders -- and, perhaps, the bookstore business itself -- in this short but poignant essay.

"HUNTER" NOW AVAILABLE FROM AMAZON IN PRINT OR EBOOK

2011-07-16T14:55:00.000-04:00

The big 486-page trade paperback edition of HUNTER is now in stock and for sale at Amazon.

YOUR CUSTOMER OPTIONS:

1. To get the print edition from Amazon.com for $15.95 + shipping, click here.

2. You can also get the print edition directly from me, personally inscribed for you, for only $15.00 (one dollar savings) + shipping. Send me a personal message if you prefer this option: RobertTheWriter(at)gmail(dot)com

3. Or, you can buy and download the ebook editions of HUNTER for just $3.99, in all of the following formats:

* Click here for the Kindle edition.

* Click here for the Nook edition.

* Click here for other ereader devices, such as Sony Reader, Kobo, iPad, etc.:

* Also, many common devices can double as "ereaders," including PCs, Macs, iPads, Blackberries, palm devices, Android phones, iPhones, other smart phones, etc. All you need are FREE "Kindle apps" for any of these devices, which allow you to browse the Amazon Kindle Store for ebooks, then buy and download them. To get those free apps, click here.

Finally, the linked sites above -- the Kindle Store, BN.com, and Smashwords -- all allow you to download, or read online, sample chapters of the book, too, before you decide to purchase. So check it out at the links, and decide whether HUNTER is for you.

Book Review: "The Philosophical Practitioner," by Larry Abrams

2011-07-14T11:36:00.000-04:00

THE PHILOSOPHICAL PRACTITIONER
by Larry Abrams

Kindle edition: $4.99
Trade paperback: $15.54

Reviewed by Robert Bidinotto

In an age of formula fiction, a novel with a fresh premise is an unexpected delight. The Philosophical Practitioner is such an original, witty, thought-provoking, and polished bit of writing that it's hard to believe it is Larry Abrams's debut novel.

Eric, the first-person protagonist of this clever tale, is a "philosophical practitioner." That's something like a psychotherapist or "life coach." But instead of focusing on emotions and childhood traumas, Eric emphasizes the key role that reason, and his clients' philosophic ideas and values, play in causing and resolving their problems, and ultimately, in achieving their dreams and happiness.

Eric isn't rich, but he loves the intellectual challenges of his work, and he enjoys helping people straighten out their lives. He has a small roster of colorful clients, a cat named Circe, and a girlfriend named Sheila who is a famous movie actress. (How and why they are a couple is part of the story.)

Eric also has his own problems. Reconciling his modest New York lifestyle with that of his superstar, Hollywood-rooted girlfriend. Coping with his ailing father, who lives in a Florida nursing home. And -- oh yes -- worrying about that strange lady with a gun who shows up, repeatedly, at his office door, promising to kill him for reasons she won't specify...then vanishing.

The latter mystery provides the story's thread of mounting suspense. Eric must deal with that looming threat, emotionally and practically, while he wrestles with the problems that his neurotic clientele bring into his office. What is most clever about the story is how Abrams uses these sessions to explore some of the fundamental philosophical questions that we all face: how to find meaning in life; our need to define fulfilling goals; how to navigate the shoals of intimate relationships; whether to choose personal independence versus the siren calls of money, fame, and power.

If this material sounds dry, trust me: In Abrams's hands, it is anything but. His dialogue is razor-sharp banter; descriptions of dress and mannerisms are transparent windows on characters' souls; and Eric's first-person, internal monologue is a virtual stand-up comedy routine for the reader, loaded with hilarious but incisive observations about all things large and small -- anything that seizes his attention (which seems to suffer from a touch of A.D.D.). It's great fun to look at the world through this character's wry, shrewd, but quirky perspective.

Larry Abrams brings a fresh new voice to fiction that I want to hear again. There's plenty of potential for Eric, the philosophical practitioner, to have a long and happy career, both in his office, and also in the pages of future books.

Man pleads guilty to child porn, then allowed to view child porn in jail

2011-07-13T15:22:00.002-04:00

Anyone who thinks that the legal outrages described in my vigilante thriller, HUNTER, are exaggerated, ought to check out this A.P. story:

A legal loophole is allowing a Washington state man accused of child sex crimes to view child pornography in jail.

Weldon Marc Gilbert is acting as his own lawyer in the case, and that means he's entitled to review the evidence.

The evidence in the case includes more than 100 videos seized from Gilbert's Lake Tapps home after his 2007 arrest. Authorities say some of the footage was shot by Gilbert.

MY INTERVIEW ON "1ST AUTHOR INTERVIEWS" WEBSITE

2011-07-13T11:09:00.000-04:00

A website, "First Author Interviews," has just published an interview with me about HUNTER.

I think that many of you will find it informative. (My only objection: the poor formatting of the book excerpt.)

5 traditionally published authors who have gone "indie"

2011-07-12T17:49:00.000-04:00

Here is an absolutely fascinating roundtable interview with five women, each traditionally published, who have decided to self-publish. Why? They provide a host of details about their experiences and the reasons for their respective decisions. Here is just a small sample:

How does self-publishing compare for you to your traditional publishing experience?

Kathryn Shay: For me, self publishing is a lot easier, and more lucrative, than traditional publishing. I’m thrilled so many of my earlier books are getting readers (over 38,000 people have downloaded AFTER THE FIRE, which just went free on Amazon). And in some ways, writing is more enjoyable for me because I get to write about what I want and write the way I want to. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoyed working with editors in many respects. But I’d rather have control of the content and style of my work.

Beth Orsoff: I’ve had much more success self-publishing than I did as a traditionally published author. I’ve sold many more books, earned ten times as much money, and I’m able to write what I want instead of what an agent or editor thinks will sell.

Patricia Ryan: Self-publishing has been a revelation for me! I love having control over the packaging and distribution of my books, and the high royalties, paid monthly, provide a steady income, something writers rarely get to enjoy.

Julie Ortolon: No comparison. I love everything about self-publishing. The freedom, the lack of stress, the control. That said, writing under contract for major print publishers was a great training ground. Succeeding at self publishing without that experience would probably be harder for me. Writing for a publisher taught me to think about the whole picture: the marketing, packaging, target audience. Working with editors and copy editors really helped me hone my craft. Does that mean I couldn’t succeed in self-publishing today if I were just starting out and hadn’t had that training ground? No. But writers who choose self-publishing need to know it’s not a short cut or easy out. You gotta put in the work. Sloppy craft just won’t cut it.

There is a wealth of experienced-based perspective here for any author or would-be author contemplating options. As ever, read the whole thing.

The state of publishing: a Thrillerfest recap by Bob Mayer

2011-07-12T15:20:00.000-04:00

Bob Mayer, one of the smartest independent authors and publishers around, attended the recent "Thrillerfest" convention in New York.

Bob served on panels, and he met with authors, publishers, and agents. He took away many fascinating observations about the state of the book business. Now he shares those insights in this valuable blog post.

"HUNTER" IS NOW AVAILABLE IN PRINT

2011-07-11T10:16:00.002-04:00

HUNTER: A THRILLER is now out in its print edition. You can order the trade paperback at this link.

Other news:

As of this morning (July 11), HUNTER hit #4 on Amazon's "Top Rated in Romantic Suspense" titles, based on reader ratings. And this morning it was also down to #46 (from #75, just days ago) on "Top Rated in Mysteries and Thrillers."

A nice way to start the week.

~~And today, the final print-edition proof arrives. If it's good, I'll authorize orders to start ASAP, and come back here to give you a link.~~

As you may know, HUNTER is already available as an ebook. And you do NOT need a dedicated "ereader" device to order and read an ebook. You can download and read them on your home computer or laptop, your Blackberry, smart phone, etc.

The ebook editions of HUNTER can be ordered in all the following formats, for just $3.99:

* For the Kindle

* For the Nook

* For other dedicated ereaders, such as Sony Reader, Kobo, etc.

* For devices that can double as "ereaders," including PCs, Macs, iPads, Blackberries, palm devices, Android phones, iPhones, other smart phones, etc.

These sites -- the Kindle Store, BN.com, and Smashwords -- allow you to download sample chapters of the book, too, before you decide to purchase.

Enjoy!

Print-book sales continue to plunge

2011-07-08T12:03:00.000-04:00

From Publisher's Weekly:

Print book sales fall 10% in first half of year, with adult fiction off over 25%, and mass-market paperbacks plunging 26.6%.

So...do you think I should worry about getting HUNTER into bookstores?

NOT!

"Batting for a Broken System"

2011-07-07T14:54:00.000-04:00

David Gaughran offers a spirited defense of and overwhelmingly persuasive case for the merits of self-publishing in this feisty essay. Filled with links to other great blogs and articles, too.

It's so nice to see others saying these things so well, so that I don't have to.

Must reading for self-publishing authors

2011-07-05T20:22:00.001-04:00

If you are an independently publishing author, you'd have to be living under a rock if you haven't heard of the stunning success of thriller writer John Locke. Locke has propelled his self-published "Donovan Creed" series into the stratosphere of sales on Amazon's Kindle, becoming the first indie author to achieve the staggering total of 1 million ebook sales.

Now, Locke -- an entertaining-enough author, but a genius at marketing -- has shared his secrets of ebook promotion in a brief how-to guide, How I Sold 1 Million Ebooks in 5 Months. It's a book aimed squarely at writers like...well, like me. As you know, I just launched my own ebook fiction series two weeks ago with HUNTER: A Thriller. And despite all the great reviews it's getting, I was poised to waste a lot of promotional and marketing time pursuing dead ends.

Until I made the great decision to download Locke's manual.

I'm not going to deny Mr. Locke any justly deserved sales for the book by providing any details here. Just take my word for it: This guy must have studied and absorbed all the classic marketing books, including those by Al Ries and Jack Trout, such as Positioning. He's drawn all those principles together and created an outline that will allow the self-publishing indie to take on the giants of the publishing industry and succeed.

And he did it just in time for me to apply to my own thriller. THANK YOU, Mr. Locke.

And now watch your rear-view mirror....

Authors: Do NOT miss this vital article

2011-07-02T00:26:00.000-04:00

What in hell is happening to the book business?

If you are an author, or a wannabe author, you simply MUST read this incredible but link-laden blog by Kristine Kathryn Rusch. What she describes will make you believe that Kafka has been put in charge of the publishing industry.

It will tell you why you'd be a fool to seek an agent and traditional publisher these days. Read the post, and you'll understand why I've gone the "indie" route.

What new and prospective self-publishing writers need to know

2011-07-01T17:13:00.000-04:00

Bob Mayer sold 347 ebooks during January 2011. Now, just six months later, he's selling 1,400 ebooks per day.

If you're an author, prospective author, especially a self-publishing author, then you'll want to read his blog about what made the difference for him.

I'm on Twitter

2011-07-01T16:25:00.000-04:00

It's: @RobertBidinotto.

Just FYI.

"HUNTER" is now a "Hot New Release in Romantic Suspense" on Amazon

2011-06-28T14:48:00.001-04:00

I couldn't believe it when somebody on Kindleboards called my attention to the fact yesterday that Amazon had listed my novel HUNTER: A Thriller on its list of "Hot New Releases in Romantic Suspense." In fact, she reported it as #30 on the list.

When I checked, sure enough, it was on the list at #36. Since then, I've seen it as low as #24. Currently, as I write, it's #25. Which blows me away, of course.

And the reviews on Amazon have been amazing: No less than a dozen 5-star reviews as of this writing, with only one other review listed -- at 4 stars -- that reads as if it were a 5-star rave!

Same thing over at the book's page on Barnes & Noble, where there are three 5-star reviews, and nothing less.

Until the paperback is available, those without Kindles or Nooks have several options:

* Smashwords has the ebook available in multiple formats for downloading to pretty much any other ereader (Sony Reader, Kobo, etc.) or to any device that can double as an ereader.

* Amazon offers FREE Kindle reading "apps" that allow you to download an ebook like HUNTER to your PC, Mac, iPhone, iPad, Blackberry, Android, or Windows 7 phone.

If you're not sure you'll like the book, you can also download a free sample of several chapters from the book's sales pages on Amazon (Kindle), on B&N (Nook), and on Smashwords (everything else).

And if you wonder whether to buy, despite the glowing reviews, the $3.99 price shouldn't pose much of an obstacle.

How we'll save the print-book industry

2011-06-26T08:48:00.000-04:00

Many readers are lamenting the disappearance of bookstores and dire predictions of the collapse of the print book.

But those of you who love the feel and smell and look of print books on your bookshelves: take heart. The print book has a future.

The solution is already at hand: print-on-demand books (POD). It is a publishing model that can keep the print-book industry alive, but which completely undercuts the current book industry model, which is:

* From your expensive Manhattan offices, try to guess which manuscript, among all those sent to you by hordes of agents, will have a chance to return your investment;

* decide to print only those books, and reject the rest (even including great books that you guess "won't sell");

* offer the author an advance against sales -- then hope the book will sell enough to recoup what you paid him;

* invest gadzillions of dollars into a substantial print run on that book;

* send out a hired sales force to approach all the bookstores and retail outlets to carry it;

* ship the book to distributors like Ingram and Baker & Taylor, and to the big chain warehouses, where the copies are stocked;

* wait for the chains to send them to all their stores, guessing how many copies each might need;

* advertise heavily and expensively for those titles you think have the best shot, while ignoring the rest (and hoping that one or two of them "break out" and become surprise bestsellers);

* wait a month or six weeks to see how well it sells in the stores;

* if it doesn't sell, watch as the bookstores then ship all the unsold copies back to the publisher, and/or...

* stick the unsold copies on "remainder" tables, coast to coast, where they are sold at a fraction of retail to bargain-hunters.

This is an incredibly slow, cumbersome, and wasteful process in the digital age. It rejects, up front, a lot of books of merit because publishers think they won't be profitable, while accepting a lot of books that prove not to be profitable, anyway. It requires huge investments in resources, throughout the enormously expensive book pipeline, costs that jack up the price of books to the point where print-book sales are falling off a cliff, now (see the preceding link). It requires the customer to leave his comfortable home, burn ever-more-expensive gasoline, fight traffic, and to drive to some store, perhaps many miles away; then find parking in some mall lot; then wander the aisles looking for it...often only to find that the store may not carry the title, or may have run out. Then drive home.

In contrast, here's the POD (print on demand) model, used by Amazon's "Createspace" program and others:

* Accept pretty much any book manuscript, letting customers -- not the book industry, the reviewers, and the bookstore owners -- decide whether there's a market for it.

* Have the author send in his manuscript and book cover formatted digitally, so that you can then file it on your big computer.

* Wait for customer orders to come in.

* When they do, push a button, and a fully bound book pops out of a fancy machine, looking every bit as good as anything produced in NYC.

* Mail the book to the customer.

* Offer the author all rights to his work, and much higher royalties to participate than NY publishers do, because this process is so comparatively inexpensive that you can afford to.

Now, consider how many steps, how much time, and how many resources this model saves.

POD will be the salvation of the print-book industry, in my humble opinion. As bookstores close, the current publishing industry model, described above -- which depends entirely on bookstore outlets to hawk their wares -- will collapse, too. It's simply too cumbersome and inefficient in the digital age.

And for those of you who lament the disappearance of bookstores, you know what? POD will offer you more books than ever: not just new titles, but also backlist titles. If you're a thriller fan, like me, you can take heart in knowing that Alistair MacLean and Mickey Spillane will never go "out of print," because they'll live on a computer, waiting for their fans to order them. FOREVER.

When the big, traditional publishers wise up, they'll realize that they can monetize their backlist and out-of-print titles this way, and make untold millions. They are sitting on goldmines of past inventory, which they can't afford to market under the current business model -- but which are easy to release and market as ebooks and POD books.

Oh yes: Everything I just said goes double for ebooks. Which is why Amazon is killing the competition with its Kindle Direct Publishing, and why even J.K. Rowling has made the jump to ebook self-publishing.

THAT is the future of publishing, friends. Yes, books, whether ebooks or "pbooks," have a great future -- and so do authors like me.

The face of the Self-Publishing Revolution: mine

2011-06-25T22:55:00.005-04:00

On June 22, I joined the Self-Publishing Revolution by "indie" publishing my novel HUNTER: A Thriller. I'm just one of the latest authors to do this. And this trend is changing the face of publishing.

Never before have authors had so many options: traditional publishing, small-press publishing, "indie" (self) publishing, print publishing, audio publishing, ebook publishing, and who knows what else. New technology and free markets are creating a competitive landscape that is putting writers in the driver's seat, perhaps for the first time in history. Big publishers are being compelled to offer better deals, or else they'll lose big-name authors like J.K. Rowling.

Here's the face of the Self-Publishing Revolution:

I wrote my novel on a brilliant creative writing software package, WriteItNow, which cost me a grand total of $59. I finished up on Word, which I've had for years from an old job, and cost me nothing.

Today I filed my Avenger Books paperwork with the state. From a home computer. I have the necessary business account, post office box, (home) office. Paperwork cost: $25.

I contracted out for a first-rate book cover, done for just $250 bucks by a kid out of state. He did a blog header for me, just as cool, for another $250. And a great business logo for just $40.

My ebook and print-book formatting and layout were done by a guy in Britain, who turned around the entire job in 36 hours -- for a total of less than $150.

ISBN numbers were free from Smashwords and Amazon.

My photographer accepted a nice dinner in payment.

My web guy is building a new blog for my fiction...for free, as a showcase of his wares.

Cost of blog hosting: $48 per year.

Cost of domain name for a year: $9.

Cost of ebook uploading to Amazon: $0.

Amazon marketing cost of ebooks: 30%, leaving me 70% royalties.

Up-front cost of Amazon producing my print books: $0.

Distribution cost of print books: $39, for Amazon's enhanced distribution to the book trade, so that people can order the book at their local bookstores.

P.O. Box rental: about $45 for six months.

Ebook distribution costs: $0.

Online marketing costs: Just my time.

Print book costs (if books are bought and shipped by me): several dollars less than the total revenues on sales (i.e., I make a profit).

Bottom line: I've put out a good novel, in formats of a quality comparable to that of most publishers, AND I've launched a self-publishing business -- all for about $1000. I did it years faster than if I had gone through the mainstream publishing "query-go-round." And, if I had not bothered setting up the Avenger Books business imprint and customized blog, or insisted on as good a book cover, etc., I could've gotten away with publishing the ebook and p-book for probably $200-$300.

This is what is threatening the established book industry right now: Their fixed costs are gargantuan, and their business model outmoded. Big publishing houses, book agents, and brick-and-mortar bookstores are rapidly are becoming exorbitantly expensive middle men whose only real services are printing, distribution, and marketing -- middle men that many authors no longer need and whose services they can easily replace with low-cost contract labor.

Which is why print book sales and chain bookstores continue to circle the drain. Now is the time for authors and would-be authors to join the revolution.

I'm THRILLED....

2011-06-25T13:26:00.000-04:00

Absolutely stellar reviews from early readers for HUNTER: A Thriller, up on Amazon (click the link to read them).

I could not be more pleased with the early reception. Many people are phoning and emailing me saying that the book has kept them up until 3-5 a.m. -- that they can't put it down. Others are making comparisons to books and authors that I admire hugely.

I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this. Honestly. Somebody pinch me.

You don't need a Kindle or Nook to buy & read ebooks

2011-06-23T11:33:00.000-04:00

YOU DON'T HAVE TO OWN A KINDLE OR NOOK to download and read an ebook like HUNTER on virtually any device: PC, Mac, iPhone, iPad, etc. Just go to this link and get a free "Kindle app," which will let you buy and read it on your iPhone, Blackberry, Android, or whatever.

Hey, the ebook's only $3.99, and the "app" is free. What do you have to lose (except your past respect for me as a writer)?

HUNTER is now available for sale online

2011-06-22T11:53:00.003-04:00

HUNTER: A Thriller is now alive and ready for downloading on Amazon.com, as a Kindle ebook. It is also available in a trade paperback edition at Amazon.com.

Also, for those without a Kindle (and who don't want to download free Kindle apps, to read it on other devices), you can purchase the book at Smashwords. Smashwords supplies the iPad, iPhone, Sony Reader, Kobo, and many more outlets and devices.

Also, the Nook version is now available at the Barnes & Noble online store. The print edition will be available in less than two weeks.

Thanks, everyone, for your encouragement and support.

Who knew that I wrote "Atlas Shrugged"????

2011-06-18T13:55:00.002-04:00

Hahahaha.

I just set up my "Author's Page" on Amazon.com, and by accident they listed "Atlas Shrugged" as one of MY books! Needless to say, I've notified them and I hope that is corrected right away!

My new publishing imprint

2011-06-15T16:38:00.000-04:00

Welcome to Avenger Books:

This imprint will publish my future works of fiction. Address all written inquiries about my books to:

Avenger Books
P.O. Box 555
Chester, MD 21619

Wonderful advance reader responses for "Hunter"

2011-06-12T11:28:00.000-04:00

I'm back from a week's vacation with The Wife in North Carolina, during which time my "beta readers" have been sharing their feedback with me on the manuscript for Hunter.

I'm tremendously encouraged by their enthusiastic responses, and humbled by their detailed critiques and suggestions. The published book will be much improved, thanks to their invaluable input and insights.

This week, I'll be racing to incorporate corrections and tweaks, kick development of a new "fiction" blog into gear; finalize my marketing plan; and prepare the manuscript for ebook and print-book publication. There are many things to do, so my posts will be limited here. But I hope that the book -- which should be available by the end of June in ebook editions, and early July in print -- will be more than a worthy substitute for blog posts.

Finishing my first novel on June 4th

2011-06-03T23:27:00.001-04:00

I've just finished the climactic chapter of my novel, HUNTER: A Thriller.

I can't begin to tell you how I feel about it. Let's just say that I've poured wine and am toasting myself.

I'll finish the final "tying up loose ends" chapter tomorrow, and then my first novel is DONE.

The day before my 62nd birthday. As I promised myself.

The book will be available as an ebook by month's end, and almost immediately thereafter as a trade paperback. Details to come.

Thanks to all of you who have either encouraged or endured me during this process.

UPDATE -- C'est fini...just an hour or so before my birthday. Can't tell you how great it feels.

How the Ruling Class manages America's collapse

2011-05-30T11:07:00.000-04:00

The inimitable Mark Steyn, in his inimitable style, connects a few dots from the news in order to sketch a telling portrait of America's decline. This time he provides both a macro- and micro-view of the workings, and staggering costs, of our Regulatory State -- designed and managed by Ruling Class grandees and bureaucratic caliphs. Sample:

Plucked at random from the ObamaCare bill:

"The Secretary shall develop oral healthcare components that shall include tooth-level surveillance."

"Tooth-level surveillance"? Has that phrase ever been used before in the entirety of human history? Say what you like about George III but the redcoats never attempted surveillance of Gen. Washington's dentures. Why not just call it "gum control"?

The hyper-regulatory state is unrepublican. It strikes at one of the most basic pillars of free society: equality before the law. When you replace "law" with "regulation," equality before it is one of the first casualties. In such a world, there is no law, only a hierarchy of privilege more suited to a sultan's court than a self-governing republic. If you don't want to be subject to "tooth-level surveillance," you better know who to call in Washington. Teamsters Local 522 did, and the United Federation of Teachers, and the Chicago Plastering Institute. And as a result they've all been "granted" ObamaCare "waivers." Rule, Obama! Obama, waive the rules! If only for his cronies. Americans are being transferred remorselessly from the rule of law to rule by an unaccountable bureaucracy of micro-regulatory preferences, subsidies, entitlements and incentives that determine which of the multiple categories of Unequal-Before-The-Law Second-Class (or Third-Class, or Fourth-Class) Citizenship you happen to fall into.

And yet Americans put up with it. According to the Small Business Administration, the cost to the economy of government regulation is about $1.75 trillion per annum. You and your fellow citizens pay for that – and it's about twice as much as you pay in income tax. Or, to put it another way, the regulatory state sucks up about a quarter-trillion dollars more than the entire GDP of India. As fast as India's growing its economy, we're growing our regulations faster. Oh, well, you shrug, it would be unreasonable to expect the bloated, somnolent hyperpower to match those wiry little fellows back at the call center in Bangalore. Okay. It's also about a quarter-trillion dollars more than the GDP of Canada. Every year we're dumping the equivalent of a G7 economy into ever more ludicrous and wasteful regulation.

As ever, read it all.

Amazon moves into big-time publishing

2011-05-25T16:26:00.002-04:00

Robin Sullivan, who is attending BookExpo America (aka "BEA"), reports that the really big buzz so far is that Amazon is moving into publishing, big time.

In contrast to the legacy publishers, Amazon has demonstrated that it knows exactly what it's doing, which is how it has come to dominate, first, online book marketing, then the ereader market, and then the ebook self-publishing market. Now it is diving into print publishing, too -- first with "CreateSpace" for self-publishing authors, and now with a number of genre imprints for select titles.

As I've noted before, Amazon clearly has the goal of achieving complete "vertical integration" in the book business: from attracting authors and their manuscripts, to publishing (Kindle Direct Publishing, CreateSpace, and a host of print imprints), to creating great sales platforms (online and the Kindle).

Amazon has allowed authors to bypass the need to hire agents before getting published; they have allowed authors to avoid getting trapped in the endless "query go 'round" with traditional publishers, hawking their manuscripts for months or years and waiting desperately for acceptance; they have let authors bypass the need to have agents or lawyers parse the fine print of book contracts (by offering a single, simple deal to all); and they've allowed authors to bypass bookstores and still be able to generate big sales.

Amazon also has dramatically accelerated the process of book publishing (from edited manuscript to publication within weeks, instead of a year or more), of paying author royalties (monthly, with just a 60-day lag, instead of semi-annually or even annually), and of generating marketing attention (through online linking, reviewing, and recommendations). In short, they've made the process of book publishing completely painless and author-friendly.

Now, they're taking those same practices into the print business and are planning to seduce bestselling authors away from the legacy presses with better deals. To head up this operation, they've hired the former CEO of Time-Warner Publishing. How good will their contracts be for authors? Well, even Joe Konrath and Blake Crouch, two hugely successful self-publishers, have been offered a contract attractive enough that they've agreed to let Amazon publish a print version of their new collaborative novel, Stirred -- an inaugural title for Thomas & Mercer, Amazon's new mystery and thriller imprint. Amazon also has launched Montlake Romance, its imprint brand for the romance genre, and is about to unveil a sci-fi/fantasy imprint, too. These are added to Amazon's existing imprints: AmazonEncore (the company's flagship general imprint), AmazonCrossing (dedicated to literature in translation), Kindle Direct Publishing (for self-pubbed ebooks), and CreateSpace (for print-book self-publishing).

As a measure of how much Amazon is disrupting the book industry -- from publishers to agents to bookstores -- check out this piece in Publishers Weekly, commenting about the launch of Amazon's Montlake Romance imprint. You don't have to read between the lines to see how worried they are.

UPDATE The NYT reports on BookExpo America, saying, "There is a Wild West quality to the book business these days":

E-books have exploded, surpassing print sales for some new releases. The struggles for many brick-and-mortar bookstores have deepened as their customers began downloading books onto their e-readers from home rather than heading to stores.

Easily eliciting the most chatter was Amazon’s announcement on Sunday that it had hired one of the industry’s best-known veterans, the publisher turned agent Laurence J. Kirshbaum, to head a new imprint for Amazon that will publish general-interest titles. On Wednesday Amazon said it had acquired a book by the thriller writer Barry Eisler, who had announced this year, with much fanfare, that he was abandoning a six-figure contract with his publisher out of dissatisfaction with the traditional book industry.

But offering more probing and prescient observations, this guy calls the BEA shindig "industry dinosaurs on parade":

The New York Times claimed that “e-business is the buzz” at BEA. Not a chance. Read between the lines of the action on the floor, listen to the people in the trenches of publishing and selling books, and you see an industry that still hasn’t begun to comprehend the e-media revolution that is rapidly engulfing it. The industry is a mass of silent film stars telling each other that the talkies are no threat.

I attended BEA on Tuesday and found that, overall, interest in technology is superficial at best. In the eyes of the industry — that is, as one person put it, the old white men in their 60s and 70s who run the big publishers –- e-books and what they represent are a curiosity and maybe potential opportunity. But they aren’t vital to to the industry because its captains think they have all the time in the world to understand and exploit it.

Their focus is still on paper, on cutting deals and cutting costs, on keeping business, as much as possible, as it always has been. And, understandably, you can’t walk easily walk away from the bulk of your business. However, the publishers have fought progress rather than embraced it. Collectively, publishing decided to stick its big toe into the ocean just as a series of 8-foot waves are about to hit the shore. The result will be ugly.

That's how I see it, too.

UPDATE #2 -- Author Michael A. Stackpole explains why traditional publishers are going the way of the Dodo bird, and author & publisher Dean Wesley Smith adds his thoughts in a blog post and some appended comments.

Meanwhile, Publishers Lunch -- a quasi-official daily e-letter covering the industry from the vantage point of legacy publishers -- reports in its 5/26/11 issue the following:

Eisler's Next John Rain Novel to Amazon's Thomas & Mercer

At our Publishers Launch Conference Wednesday afternoon [at BookExpo America], [best-selling thriller author] Barry Eisler announced that, rather than self-publishing, his next John Rain novel THE DETACHMENT will be published by Amazon's new mystery/thriller imprint Thomas & Mercer in both digital and print formats. "What Amazon has offered is everything that was so great to me about self publishing on the one hand, but everything you want from traditional publishing," including marketing and distribution. "I get the best of both worlds," he added.

Amazon is also paying Eisler an advance, one "that was comparable to what St, Martin's was offering in the deal I ultimately decided didn't make sense." They [have] also given him "control over the packaging and consultation over the pricing of the book," with a royalty he called "much more favorable" than a traditional deal. (It's for world rights, and includes audio as well.)

The royalties offered for the print edition are also "comparable" to the St. Martin's deal, and Eisler suggested that "paper has become a subsidiary right" with "independent advertising value"....

When an audience member asked about the nature of Amazon's contract, Eisler (who is trained as an attorney) said "I've never seen a better publishing agreement than what Amazon presented me. It's readable, it's understandable, and it's transparent."

Eisler went on to explain that the ebook deal from Amazon was so sweet that he was willing to take more modest royalties on his print edition, so that the book would do well in bookstores and generate lots of attention for the ebook. This pricing strategy infuriated traditional booksellers at BEA:

In the following panel, however, ABA [American Booksellers Association] COO Len Vlahos took issue strongly with Eisler's contention that booksellers should be happy to sell low-priced print versions of books which Amazon publishes digitally. "Organizationally we could not disagree with Barry Eisler more." Vlahos objected to having "one entity [Amazon] basically use [print] books as a loss leader and devalue books.... I applaud his innovation, but I think it's grossly misguided. If you do the math on what he is talking about, Amazon is going to lose a lot of money on their contract with him, and you have to wonder about that."

To which I say: Ha! Amazon has demonstrated that it's anything but stupid. What really frosts the legacy press is the fact that Amazon is starting to woo away their bestselling authors with far better deals; that it will no doubt cut the cover prices of print books; and that it will still make money -- which they can't.

Major publishing executives confirm their utter incompetence

2011-05-25T14:29:00.002-04:00

Executives representing traditional publishing companies, on an industry panel this week at BookExpo America, demonstrate their utter cluelessness about how to address the ebook revolution. Here's a sample, to give you a clear grasp of their self-admitted incompetence:

Though none of the panelists, publishers all, were ready to say they don’t care about consumers—Random House Digital President Amanda Close immediately responded that “we have always cared deeply about our consumers”—they admitted that they’re facing stiff challenges in getting readers to discover new e-books. “Publishers do not know how to market e-books yet,” said Evan Schnittman, Managing Director of Group Sales and Marketing at Bloomsbury. Or, rather, they know how to market the new titles that they’re simultaneously marketing in stores, but the older titles that publishers are converting into e-books present more of a challenge. “Let’s be honest with ourselves, we’ve never marketed backlist before,” Schnittman said.

"Backlist" refers to older titles, the ones that the publishers no longer push. The way the industry has worked to date, they throw out a book for a few weeks, wait for the sales (and unsold returns) from bookstores, then forget about it (and its author) and move on to the next book, hoping for a bestseller. For authors, this means that their books have little chance of being discovered by readers before their publishers abandon efforts to sell them, and they become "backlist titles" -- which one exec admits "we've never marketed."

The ebook revolution has allowed authors to (sometimes) reclaim from publishers the rights to these older titles, then self-publish them. Books that are years old are now discovering new readers as ebooks, and some are selling hugely. But traditional publishers are sitting on vast archives of these works, and haven't a clue what to do with them.

Here's another report about the same panel. Skim it, then try to answer two questions: (1) What the hell are these self-important idiots saying? and (2) What author in his right mind would entrust his work and career to this collection of lame-brains?

How independent bookstores might survive

2011-05-23T13:25:00.002-04:00

A couple of posts down, I took note of the spiteful boycott by independent booksellers against "indie" authors Joe Konrath and Blake Crouch, because of their decision to publish a book with Amazon. Many independent bookstores regard Amazon as the Great Satan of the book business, the "enemy" who is putting them out of business.

This is stupid. It isn't Amazon that's putting them out of business; it's their customers. Customers want maximum choices and convenience, minimum prices and wasted time. Right now, Amazon does a much better job of giving them those things than do bookstores, including "indie" bookstores.

So, is there anything that independent bookstores can do to save themselves, in an era when so many of their customers are taking their physical book purchases online to sources such as Amazon, or to ereaders such as the Kindle, Nook, and iPad?

Maybe. But to survive, they'll have to get out of the way of the customer-driven bandwagon, and instead leap on board. If indie bookstores want to survive, then -- in addition to those suggestions offered by Konrath and Crouch at the linked blog post -- here are a few more things I would do if I owned an independent bookstore:

1. Turn your physical location into an advantage, rather than a liability. Change from being just another warehouse for books, into becoming a constant meeting place for authors and their fans.

This expands on a point made by Konrath and Crouch. There is a BIG niche market of fans who want to meet their favorite authors -- including local authors. I know fans (self included) who would drive many miles to spend time with their favorite writers.

So, transform your store into a literary meeting place -- not just in the evenings, but all day -- where authors meet with their fans. It benefits authors by cementing their bond with readers and peddling their wares. It obviously benefits readers. And, if the stores charged a small cover fee ($5?) for the event, as well as sell the author's books (including POD books on consignment), that would keep the lights on and pay the hired help.

Authors can also be invited to hold workshops about writing, self-publishing, etc. The authors could charge a fee, and the bookstore could take a cut.

2. Embrace indie/self-published titles, rather than banishing them. Many readers love novelty in novels (and nonfiction). They can buy Big6 bestsellers everywhere. But where can they get edgy, unusual, provocative, or unsung titles? Not in Barnes & Noble. And who there would know much about them?

So, become known as THE place that stocks and advises readers about indie titles.

3. Embrace ebooks. Hold classes for potential buyers to explain and demonstrate the various differences among various ereader gadgets, and how to use each device most effectively. Run hand-holding sessions for the technologically timid to introduce them to the Brave New World of ebooks and ereaders. Then stock and sell ereaders to your customers. Or rent them, by the day.

4. Partner. If all indie stores in a region worked together, they could coordinate their calendars of events so that they could run "tours" of authors among the various member stores in nearby towns. "Meet Author X at 10 a.m. in Store A." "Meet Author X at 1 p.m. in Store B." "Meet Author X at 7 p.m. in Store C." Advantage for the author: He can sell lots of books and meet lots of fans in a given region during a short period of time. Advantage for stores: a constant flow of interesting authors.

Will ideas like this save indie stores? I don't know. But it's clear their current business model won't work much longer. Either they transform themselves to embrace the current customer-driven changes, or they won't survive. That's the message they need to confront. Throwing temper tantrums against indie authors such as Joe Konrath is just trying to kill the messenger.

UPDATE -- Dean Wesley Smith really knows how to think outside the cliche -- and he has an absolutely fabulous idea. So good, in fact, that I think you'll soon see this one at stores everywhere: books in the form of GIFT CARDS.

UPDATE #2 -- News for chain bookstores on May 25 isn't great.

From Books-a-Million: Sales for Books-A-Million's first quarter dropped 11 percent to $104 million, with store comps falling 13.2 percent from last year (when the company reported a 3.6 percent drop from 2009.) The bookseller lost $3.5 million, compared to $2 million in profits at this time last year. Clyde Anderson, CEO, blamed "the growing effect of e-book penetration" and "the effects of the devastating tornado outbreak" that hit the Midwest and Southeast region in the early part of 2011. Yeah -- blame the weather.

Meanwhile, from Barnes & Noble comes news of an unspecified number of layoffs, including executives, at a New Jersey distribution center.

Time to demonstrate your faith

2011-05-20T15:24:00.001-04:00

As I work feverishly toward the completion of my novel, I urge all those who truly believe that the world is going to end on Saturday, May 21, to consider making an irrevocable bequest of all their worldly goods to the Bidinotto Fund for the Advancement of Bidinotto.

After all, you won't be needing that stuff where you're going, right? And won't such a gesture be a grand demonstration of your faith?

UPDATE -- Except for Arnold Schwarzenegger, we all seem to have survived the weekend. Time to celebrate with a song.

Publishing worlds in collision

2011-05-20T11:42:00.000-04:00

I've been chronicling the rapid, cataclysmic changes in the publishing industry for some months (scroll down here, and also check out the back entries in my Facebook page). But as the traditional book business disintegrates, many behind-the-scenes battles between the various factions -- traditional ("Legacy") publishers vs. self-publishing ("indie") authors, ebooks vs. print books, authors vs. their publishers and agents, online retailers vs. bookstores, etc. -- are now emerging into public view as open warfare.

The latest skirmish? Self-publishing guru Joe Konrath has accepted a deal with Thomas & Mercer -- a mystery-and-thriller imprint just launched by Amazon -- to issue a print-book edition of his new novel, Stirred. This has some independent bookstores (which regard online retailer Amazon as a threat to their survival) up in arms. Konrath writes about it here:

It's come to my attention that on a Yahoo group for booksellers there has been a call to boycott Amazon's new Thomas & Mercer imprint. I signed with Thomas & Mercer for STIRRED, the eighth Jack Daniels novel, co-written with Blake Crouch (who will chime in on this topic after me).

I've also heard that certain booksellers want to return any books of mine they have in stock as a punitive measure.

So signing a deal with Amazon makes me the enemy of bookstores?

Me, who has signed at over 1200 bookstores? Who has thanked over 1500 booksellers by name in the acknowledgements of my novels? Who has named five major characters in my series after booksellers?

Now I'm the bad guy, for wanting to continue my series and make a living?

Konrath and co-author Crouch offer a lengthy response at the link, advising independent bookstores about some of the steps they must take if they hope to survive in the new digital age. It's worth reading, not only as a heads-up about emerging trends, but as a microcosmic example of what happens whenever an Establishment confronts innovations that threaten their once-comfortable status quo.

Now, self-published audio books

2011-05-19T11:04:00.001-04:00

Audible.com has just launched a program to let you narrate your own audiobook, or hire a professional narrator, then publish it yourself for either a flat fee (great!) or a 50/50 royalty split (not so great).

Check it out here.

Also check out some commentary about this program here.

I. Love. It.

UPDATE -- From a news release today from Amazon:

Today, less than four years after introducing Kindle books, Amazon.com customers are now purchasing more Kindle books than all print books - hardcover and paperback - combined. . . .

Recent milestones for Kindle include:

* Since April 1, for every 100 print books Amazon.com has sold, it has sold 105 Kindle books. This includes sales of hardcover and paperback books by Amazon where there is no Kindle edition. Free Kindle books are excluded and if included would make the number even higher.

* So far in 2011, the tremendous growth of Kindle book sales, combined with the continued growth in Amazon's print book sales, have resulted in the fastest year-over-year growth rate for Amazon's U.S. books business, in both units and dollars, in over 10 years. This includes books in all formats, print and digital. Free books are excluded in the calculation of growth rates.

* In the five weeks since its introduction, Kindle with Special Offers for only $114 is already the bestselling member of the Kindle family in the U.S.

* Amazon sold more than 3x as many Kindle books so far in 2011 as it did during the same period in 2010.

* Less than one year after introducing the UK Kindle Store, Amazon.co.uk is now selling more Kindle books than hardcover books, even as hardcover sales continue to grow. Since April 1, Amazon.co.uk customers are purchasing Kindle books over hardcover books at a rate of more than 2 to 1.

For authors like me, who will have his first novel self-published on Kindle (and elsewhere) in June, this is great news. It confirms that the market for ebooks hasn't even begun to be tapped, let alone "saturated." As prices for self-published ebooks continue to undercut the inflated prices of the Big 6 publishers, more and more customers are encouraged to buy more and more books, across more and more platforms.

More warnings and advice for authors

2011-05-19T11:02:00.000-04:00

Prolific author and self-publisher Kristine Kathryn Rusch begins a new blog series advising established authors and newbies alike about the rapid changes in the publishing industry, and how to survive and thrive in this evolving world:

Traditional publishing has lost its monopoly. It used to control the distribution of books all over the United States and, indeed, all over the world. With the success of the e-reader and ease of electronic self-publishing, writers regained control over distribution.

Concurrent with that was the rise of a new model for print-on-demand. No longer does a writer have to purchase thousands of books at the cost of thousands of dollars. The writer can upload her novel at almost no cost out of her pocket, and not print a single copy until she has an order. In fact, the POD company, like CreateSpace and LightningSource, will produce the book and ship it for the author, so there is no warehousing, no pile of books rotting in an author’s basement.

In other words, all parts of the distribution chain are now available to the entrepreneurial author. Including, as of last week, audio books, since Audible has now instituted a system in which an author can do her own audio books.

Traditional publishers got blindsided by this. So did agents, who rely on their contacts in traditional publishing to make their living. And both groups are now in survival mode. They’re trying to hang onto their hefty incomes in a new world they don’t entirely understand.

Mostly, they’re doing so by making huge rights grabs from authors.

As ever, read it all.

How George Soros bought the Mainstream Media

2011-05-18T11:38:00.001-04:00

The next time you hear (or voice) accusations about "political bias" in the mainstream media (a.k.a. the "MSM") -- or you wonder why a unified chorus of media voices all arise, simultaneously and "spontaneously," to offer identical opinions (often in the same words) on a given topic -- consider The Source.

I have capitalized those two words, hoping that they become a form of rhetorical currency when describing left-wing billionaire financier George Soros and his role as mainstream media impressario. Soros has taken it upon himself to make sure that the MSM chorus all sing from the same page, in the same key, on any issue of interest to him.

The Media Research Center's Business and Media Institute is about to release a major report describing the astounding reach and influence of Soros's money in the mainstream media. Dan Gainor of the Center has just published a two-part series on FoxNews.com that summarizes the report's findings.

In part one, we learn that Soros and his network of advocacy and funding groups have close ties with some 30 major media outlets–including The New York Times, Washington Post, the Associated Press, NBC and ABC. Big names in "mainstream" journalism sit on the boards of Soros's organizations and funding-recipient groups; millions of dollars from his foundations and funding conduits go into MSM "journalism" (read: propaganda) projects; and even so-called journalism "watchdog" groups and newspaper ombudsmen -- who are supposed to police the news media for bias and violations of ethics -- are in his hip pocket. Gainor notes:

Journalists, we are constantly told, are neutral in their reporting. In almost the same breath, many bemoan the influence of money in politics. It is a maxim of both the left and many in the media that conservatives are bought and paid for by business interests. Yet where are the concerns about where their money comes from?

Fred Brown, who recently revised the book “Journalism Ethics: A Casebook of Professional Conduct for News Media,” argues journalists need to be “transparent” about their connections and “be up front about your relationship” with those who fund you.

Unfortunately, that rarely happens. While the nonprofits list who sits on their boards, the news outlets they work for make little or no effort to connect those dots.

Part two of the series reveals that. . .

Since 2003, Soros has spent more than $48 million funding media properties, including the infrastructure of news – journalism schools, investigative journalism and even industry organizations.

And that number is an understatement. It is gleaned from tax forms, news stories and reporting. But Soros funds foundations that fund other foundations in turn, like the Tides Foundation, which then make their own donations. A complete accounting is almost impossible because a media component is part of so many Soros-funded operations. . . .

It turns out that Soros’ influence doesn’t just include connections to top mainstream news organizations such as NBC, ABC, The New York Times and Washington Post. It’s bought him connections to the underpinnings of the news business. The Columbia Journalism Review, which bills itself as “a watchdog and a friend of the press in all its forms,” lists several investigative reporting projects funded by one of Soros foundations.

The “News Frontier Database” includes seven different investigative reporting projects funded by Soros’ Open Society Institute. Along with ProPublica, there are the Center for Public Integrity, the Center for Investigative Reporting and New Orleans’ The Lens. The Columbia School of Journalism, which operates CJR, has received at least $600,000 from Soros, as well.

Imagine if conservative media punching bags David and Charles Koch had this many connections to journalists. Even if the Kochs could find journalists willing to support conservative media (doubtful), they would be skewered by the left.

Read the two-part series, and you'll understand exactly why the mainstream media have become members in good standing of our Ruling Class. Much of it can be traced back to The Source.

UPDATE -- As Gainor pointed out, consider how the media have been treating libertarian billionaires David and Charles Koch, brothers who have contributed heavily to classical liberal/limited government/free market causes and political movements:

The Koch brothers have been on the receiving end of non-stop attacks from liberal journalists and academics ever since Jane Mayer published a hit piece on them last year in The New Yorker purporting to show that their contributions were behind the rise of the “Tea Party” movement. This wildly exaggerated claim was meant to cast the Koch brothers as great villains, but villains possessed of a satanic combination of power and tactical brilliance. In a predictable course, Mayer’s fairy tale was circulated by the columnists and editorial writers of the New York Times and from there through a network of second-level columnists and political magazines until at length it came to the attention of the credulous foot soldiers of the liberal-left who have kept the pot boiling in recent months with ever more inventive and exaggerated versions of the original lie.

The media double standard is obvious: They'll trash the Koch brothers "non-stop," but not breathe a peep against George Soros. After all, you don't bite the hand that feeds you.

The future of libraries in the digital age

2011-05-16T16:22:00.000-04:00

Bestselling marketing author Seth Godin has some provocative thoughts about what we need, and where we're headed, in the realm of information storage and searching.

This is why we call them "the Ruling Class"

2011-05-14T12:11:00.001-04:00

In its infamous Kelo ruling, a 5-4 majority of U.S. Supreme Court justices declared that you, Joe Citizen, no longer possess the right (guaranteed in the Constitution) to secure home ownership -- not if local governments simply want to take it from you and give it away to another private party (usually some politically connected corporation or other favored cronies). They thus expunged, de facto, the constitutionally mandated rationale of "public use" from the "takings" clause of the Fifth Amendment: Now, seizure of property could be for somebody else's private use -- as long as local politicians rationalized that such naked theft served some sort of vaguely described "public purpose."

The latest spectacle in judicial evisceration of the U.S. Constitution was provided this week by the Indiana Supreme Court. In a 3-2 ruling, the court decided that if a police officer enters your home illegally, you have no right under the Fourth Amendment to resist:

Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.

"We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David said. "We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest."

David said a person arrested following an unlawful entry by police still can be released on bail and has plenty of opportunities to protest the illegal entry through the court system. . . .

This is the second major Indiana Supreme Court ruling this week involving police entry into a home.

On Tuesday, the court said police serving a warrant may enter a home without knocking if officers decide circumstances justify it. Prior to that ruling, police serving a warrant would have to obtain a judge's permission to enter without knocking.

Note the excuse offered by the court: Resisting illegal entry is "against public policy" and "modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence." What is "public policy"? Why, it's whatever politicians now say it is. And what is "modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence"? Why, it's the obliteration of what the Fourth Amendment meant when the Framers wrote it.

Make no mistake: These rulings are part and parcel of the century-long effort by Progressives to annihilate the U.S. Constitution. Since the days of Woodrow Wilson, they have seen the Constitution as an impediment to their power to "do good." Systematically dismantling the Constitution therefore has been a central objective in their social-engineering efforts.

The Framers sought to root the Constitution in "natural law"; as one scholar describes it, "the idea that there are rational objective limits to the power of legislative rulers. The foundations of law are accessible through human reason and it is from these laws of nature that human created laws gain whatever force they have."

By contrast, the "legal positivism" movement, which has its roots in the utilitarian philosophy of Jeremy Bentham, holds as its basic premise "that there is no inherent or necessary connection between the validity of a law on the one hand, and ethics or morality on the other. Therefore, in legal positivism, the law is seen as being conceptually separate (though of course not separated in practice) from moral and ethical values, and it simply sees the law as being posited by lawmakers, who are humans." Another authoritative source declares that "positivism is the view that law is a social construction." While positivists disagree about many things, that premise -- that law is a matter of social convention -- opens the door for the kind of relativism we see underlying the court decisions I mentioned.

The stampede from "natural law" underpinnings of the Constitution to complete relativism accelerated with the "legal realism" movement, popular in the early Twentieth Century and identified with such noted figures as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Roscoe Pound, Justice Benjamin Cardozo, and Justice Louis Brandeis. The Supreme Court justices, in particular, issued rulings from this vantage point that serve as important precedents to this day. As one source notes, "legal realists advance two general claims: 1) Law is indeterminate and judges, accordingly, must and do often draw on extralegal considerations to resolve the disputes before them. 2) The best answer to the question 'What is (the) law?' is 'Whatever judges or other relevant officials do'."

It's not my purpose (nor within my qualifications) to comment further on jurisprudence. My only point here, briefly, is to take passing note of the kind of theories that could have led to anti-constitutional decisions such as those in Indiana and in Kelo. And in doing that, I hope one thing becomes clear:

Such theories are nothing more than formalistic rationalizations to allow the Ruling Class to exercise arbitrary, unlimited power.

The project of the Framers was to limit the power wielded by governmental officials: to constrain it so that it conformed to "natural law," by which individuals existed as ends, with certain "inalienable rights" to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of personal happiness. This entire worldview is anathema to our self-appointed elites, which presume to dictate to the rest of us (i.e, their inferiors) how we ought to live our lives, and toward what ends. That is why Prof. Angelo Codevilla correctly labeled these elites "the Ruling Class" in his indispensable essay.

We can see, naked and exposed, the outlook and objectives of our Ruling Class in these court "rulings." While progressives upend, even destroy, our lives with their grand technocratic schemes, we are commanded to sit still, take it, and not fight back. So, what remedy then remains for the hapless citizen who is manhandled by some governmental invader who bursts into his home, without a warrant, in the dead of night? The Indiana court has given the rogue officer the legal right to do all this, then mock his victim by saying: "So, go ahead and sue me!"

I worry that these corruptions of our constitutional order are pushing the citizenry to the point of open defiance and rebellion. If our rights are no longer guaranteed and upheld by the courts, if we no longer have legal recourse address to these outrages, then what options still remain open to us?

The Ruling Class should be forewarned: Americans are not the kind of people who sit still, take it, and don't fight back.

Timely warnings and advice to indie authors

2011-05-12T12:59:00.000-04:00

Today, a number of great posts have appeared on some of the blogs of my favorite "indie" authors and publishers. Let's start with "success stories" and move along to nuts-and-bolts advice.

First, self-pub guru Joe Konrath hosts a guest post by Brit self-pub phenom Stephen Leather. Leather has "sold more than 250,000 eBooks on Kindle alone since Christmas, almost all of them in the UK." That is simply amazing. But he offers a sobering message that many writers won't want to hear, and should. "The vast majority of self-published eBooks are bad. Worse than bad. Awful. There, I’ve said it." The absence of any "gatekeepers" has allowed anyone to upload amateurish rubbish to Kindles and Nooks, the sort of stuff that would get an "F" in any high school English class (at least, any class that still grades on grammar, punctuation, coherence, etc.). Leather's message? Focus less on marketing, and more on learning the craft of writing. Hear, hear!

Next up, prolific indie author Kristine Kathryn Rusch offers a different cautionary post to writers: a five-alarm emergency warning about the scary changes in publishing that have been occurring in recent months. Drawing upon close examples of parallel changes that have occurred in the movie and recording businesses, she pleads with writers to understand how agents and traditional publishers are trying to reduce them to "indentured servant" status -- if they aren't careful. If you're an author or wannabe author, read this post.

Finally, on a more positive note, highly successful indie publisher Robin Sullivan provides sound advice to authors on how to price their ebooks to reap maximum profitability.

Many indie authors would gain the maximum benefit from this post by postponing their reading of the Rusch and Sullivan pieces, but rereading Leather's several times. I agree with him: Writers should focus primarily on becoming better writers.

UPDATE -- Just for the relief of providing some inspiration in the face of all the preceding warnings, here are profiles of (arguably) the four most prominent and successful superstars of the ebook Self-Publishing Revolution: Amanda Hocking, Barry Eisler, J.A. Konrath, and John Locke. You can only read this and say "Wow!"

Spenser's last case? Apparently not.

2011-05-12T11:22:00.000-04:00

Robert B. Parker was a seminal figure in mystery writing. He died suddenly from a heart attack in January 2010 -- appropriately, at his desk, writing. With his passing, we lost a visionary who created a world we loved to visit, and characters we began to think of as friends.

He left behind three manuscripts, two final Spenser tales and a Jesse Stone story. But neither of his two detective heroes will die any time soon, if his estate and publishers have their way. In this fine tribute to the author and his creations, Larry Thornberry tells us, with grave misgivings, that a couple of writers have been enlisted to continue feeding the New York publishing cash cow. Read all about it.

Team Obama is trying to create a new housing bubble

2011-05-11T14:50:00.000-04:00

Unsatisfied that its egalitarian Narrative has wreaked sufficient havoc already in the housing industry, the Obama administration is once again trying to force banks to loan money to bad credit risks.

At the Justice Dept., a new 20-person unit dedicated to fair lending issues received a record number of discrimination referrals from regulators in 2010 and has dozens of open cases, according to a recent agency report. Potential penalties can reach into the millions of dollars. "We are using every tool in our arsenal to combat lending discrimination," Thomas E. Perez, the assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Div., told a conference of community development advocates in Washington in April.

To some banks the crackdown has come as a surprise, say consultants and lawyers representing financial institutions in discussions with regulators. Like Midwest BankCentre, some lenders are being cited for failing to operate in minority and low-income census tracts near their branches, even when they have never done business there before. . . .

Bank lobbyists say the stepped-up government scrutiny could backfire if financial institutions decide to shrink their operations rather than yield to pressure to do business in areas that don't make sense for them.

Of course, if lenders capitulate to the government intimidation and make more bad loans, in the name of "non-discrimination," that will only inflate a new housing bubble: Unqualified borrowers will once again buy more house than they can afford, and that will set up a new scenario for another housing-market collapse.

When it comes to lending, "anti-discrimination" is just a euphemism for "lack of standards." It means that "loans" are no longer to be granted to qualified applicants, but instead are to be treated as a welfare program: as a government "entitlement" benefit to the unqualified, with taxpayers ultimately underwriting all of the catastrophic losses that will result.

Such facts and logic, supported by the bitter experience of the past few years, should offer obvious lessons to liberals. But how can facts, logic, and experience possibly compete with a Moral Narrative about "equality" that isn't drawn from reality, but from a fantasy that is imposed on reality?

Cancer's cruelty: Christopher Hitchens's lost power of speech

2011-05-10T16:34:00.000-04:00

I want to link to this heart-breaking account by Christopher Hitchens of his lost ability to speak. This is such a cruel tragedy. His was the voice of a god; but now his cancer has robbed him, and us, of its majesty.

Yet still the man can write, probably better than anyone else wielding the English language. This poignantly personal essay is glorious proof.

Question for the Week

2011-05-09T20:47:00.002-04:00

Why would it be moral to shoot Osama bin Laden in the face and blow his head apart, but immoral to pour a little water on his face and ask him some questions?

The Washington Post discovers the ebook self-publishing revolution

2011-05-09T13:50:00.001-04:00

For those of you who have not yet read any of my previous posts on the topic of ebook self-publishing -- or for those writers who are considering the idea of taking the plunge themselves -- the Washington Post printed an excellent feature story this weekend that covers the subject thoroughly and informatively.

The long article also focuses on yet another hugely successful "indie" ebook author, romance novelist Nyree Belleville. I hadn't heard of her before, but her personal rags-to-riches story is compelling. A sample:

A thin, pretty brunette who majored in economics at Stanford, Belleville had been a singer in her 20s, but that career died, and now her writing career was so flat line that one of her old publishers had even given her the rights to her first two novels.

So, out of sorts and feeling blue, she sat down one morning and figured out how to self-publish one of those novels, “Authors in Ecstasy,” on Amazon’s e-reader, the Kindle, just to see what would happen. It was a pain. She had zero graphic-arts skills. She had to create a cover, write her jacket copy, figure out formatting and set a price. She did it and forgot about it.

A few weeks later, she checked her account. She had sold 161 copies. She’d made $281. She was astonished. . . .

She put her other old book online and figured out how to place both on other e-readers — the Nook, the Sony Reader, the iPad, Kobo. The next month, her royalties bumped to $474. Giddy, she self-published a new e-book in July. She made a jaw-dropping $3,539. It was like the best thing ever!

“Every day, as the numbers ticked by, my husband and I were floored,” she says.

She got the rights to two more old novels. She feverishly wrote another e-novel, “Game for Love,” about a bad-boy pro football player and his unexpected marriage. She popped it online Dec. 15.

Earnings for that month? $19,315.

In January and February, she e-published a trilogy of young-adult novels she’d written years earlier. She called the first one “Seattle Girl” and chose a new author name, Lucy Kevin, to distinguish it from the sexually explicit Andre books.

Here’s what her first quarter looked like: 56,008 books sold; income, $116,264.

Perched on the edge of a couch in her tiny writing office, which doubles as a playroom for her kids, Belleville says: “Isn’t this just awesome?!”

Oh yes.

I'm aiming to join the Self-Pub Revolution in early June, with HUNTER: A Thriller -- and then publish some nonfiction books later this year, as well as continue with a succession of follow-up novels. I must confess, I've never been so excited in my entire lengthy writing career.

UPDATE -- Here's another inspiring post by Robin Sullivan about the self-pub phenomenon, and why it's a boon even to traditionally published authors. Robin's blog is must reading for all writers.

What works in promoting ebooks . . . or pretty much anything else

2011-05-07T17:14:00.000-04:00

Joe Konrath, whom I've dubbed "the Pied Piper of Self-Publishing," has just posted a valuable, wonderfully written blog on how indie authors can successfully promote and market their work.

His principles can be transferred to many, many other kinds of promotion, salesmanship, and marketing. And his advice will surprise many.

But if they think about it for a while, maybe it won't.

Bin Laden's death enrages the West's Fifth Column

2011-05-06T10:10:00.002-04:00

I've long thought that Osama bin Laden's success as a terrorist has been fueled by raging anti-Americanism -- not by any particular sympathy for his virulent Islamism. It's the same hatred that, for decades, has elevated a range of anti-American leftists internationally into folk heroes. Think Castro. Che. Allende. Chavez. And so many more.

Spit at the U.S., and you are beloved -- especially among an influential Fifth Column in the West. That's what the current controversy about "how" we killed bin Laden is really all about.

Take Michael Moore (please!). Here's a fat, rich Hollywood leftist creep who sings the praises of Canadian socialized medicine, and of Castro's Gulag socialized "medicine," solely to denounce our own. He makes the typical Hollywood pilgrimages to pay homage to anti-U.S. despot Hugo Chavez; he denounces our efforts to rid Afghanistan of terrorists; and now that we kill the world's most prominent terrorist, bin Laden, he denounces us for that, too.

Same with the Archbishop of Canterbury, who said that shooting mass murderer bin Laden lacked "justice," because he was -- at that moment -- possibly "unarmed." So, what would he prefer? That a SEAL challenge Osama to a duel, at twenty paces?

And then one Bob Ellis, a contemptible Aussie writer, who uses the death of bin Laden as an excuse to pour venom, not on the terrorist, but on America. "How shabby the Americans are," he declares. "How secretive and stupid. . . . What, we may ask, is [Barack Obama] now to say of a murder committed by uninvited American troops on foreign soil, illegally?"

These three creatures -- an alleged "American," a Brit, and an Aussie -- are representative of the large and loud Fifth Column operating in the West. All of them are members of the pampered Western cultural elite, gorged on the riches of capitalism; all of them hate the very system of liberty and free markets that brought them the good life and indulges their treason.

If you wonder at the spread of terrorism against the West, especially against America, then consider the fact that such traitors manufacture and validate all the excuses used by terrorists for their attacks against innocents. The bin Ladens of the world don't need to hire speechwriters when they get their best lines from the cultural leaders in our midst.

UPDATE -- I've just read a brilliant, principled response to the "chattering classes" and their hostility toward the U.S. takedown of bin Laden by Brendan O'Neill, editor of spiked. Many times the term "must reading" is applied to this article or that; but O'Neill's piece truly is "must reading," in its entirety. (If you are familiar with Angelo M. Codevilla's seminal essay, "The Ruling Class" -- another "must read" -- you'll see how O'Neill's article dovetails with it.) Some nuggets:

How did ‘I hate bin Laden and I’m glad he’s dead’ become the most shocking thing one can say in polite society?. . . .

Those who dare to celebrate his death – mainly young American jocks – have been denounced as ‘abhorrent’ and ‘sickening’, and now the main way you advertise your decency, your membership of the civilised, upstanding, oh-so-unAmerican classes, is by wondering out loud if poor old OBL shouldn’t have been arrested and put on trial rather than having a bullet planted in his head.

This pity-for-Osama lobby, this bishop-led congregation of ‘uncomfortable’ moral handwringers, might pose as radical, denouncing America’s military action in bin Laden’s compound as ‘Wild West-style vengeance’. Yet in truth it is fuelled by self-loathing more than justice-loving. These critics are not opposed to Western intervention in principle – indeed, most of them have demanded ‘humanitarian’, political or legalistic intervention in other states’ affairs at one point or another. No, it is a discomfort with decisive action, a fear of what such action might lead to in the future, and a belief that people in the West should douse their emotional zeal and learn to be more meek. . . .

Behind the high-falutin’ expressions of passion for justice over shoot-to-kill, much of the pity-for-Osama lobby is really concerned with expressing its moral superiority over apparently vengeful Americans. Where ‘them’ Yanks still have an attachment to nationalism and war, ‘we’ Europeans are post-nationalist, cosmopolitan, empathetic rather than vengeful, and are far more comfortable with having a man in a wig rather than a man with a gun sort out our moral and political problems. . . . Of course, such anti-Americanism is not confined to Europe. As we have seen in the 10 years since 9/11 it is rife within America itself, where the better-educated classes have long had an ‘uncomfortable feeling’ in relation to the antics and emotions of the American masses. . . .

It is extraordinary, and revealing, how quickly the expression of concern about the use of American force in Pakistan became an expression of values superiority over the American people. The modern chattering classes are so utterly removed from the mass of the population, so profoundly disconnected from ‘ordinary people’ and their ‘ordinary thoughts’, that they effectively see happy Americans as a more alien and unusual thing than Osama bin Laden. Where OBL wins their empathy, American jocks receive only their bile.

That's just a teaser. There's more, and it's terrific. Read it all.

My only point of departure with O'Neill is that he emphasizes simple cowardice -- the fear of provoking Muslim reprisals -- as the Ruling Class's primary motive in condemning the U.S. military action. In part, yes; but this doesn't ring entirely true to me as all, or even the dominant portion, of their motivation. I think he underestimates the stand-alone motivational power of what he described in the preceding excerpts: the Ruling Class's obsession to see itself as -- well -- the Ruling Class.

These are creatures desperate to envision themselves as a class superior in morality, sophistication, intellect, education, and taste to the lower-class rubes -- such as those who were celebrating Osama's demise in the streets. You get the same sort of response from this crowd whenever the name "Sarah Palin" is mentioned. I don't think they fear Palin so much as they celebrate a sense of self-congratulatory superiority whenever they can condescend to her. ("Oh, she said 'Gee whiz!' again, Jennifer. Can one even imagine such a hick in the White House? Hee, hee, hee. . .")

Of course, the passion to inflate their own self-images does mesh conveniently with the cowardice that O'Neill emphasizes. And we certainly do see plenty of cowardice on the part of the Ruling Class. But I think they are two separate motives, mutually reinforcing.

Indie publishing news: ebook mobile apps; why authors do not need agents

2011-05-05T13:35:00.001-04:00

I've been following what has been called "the self-publishing revolution" for months, as my own first novel, HUNTER: A Thriller, nears publication. As many of you know, I am convinced for many reasons that self-publishing—especially via ebooks—is the best deal for most authors and also the wave of the future.

The latest exciting news on this front is that Smashwords, a major ebook distribution platform, has partnered with a company called ScrollMotion to develop individual mobile applications for Smashwords' Premium Catalog of over 34,000 original ebooks. ScrollMotion will create apps for these books for Apple iOS, Android, Windows Phone 7, and WebOS, among others.

This will allow the many thousands of "indie" authors now doing distribution through Smashwords (and I'll be one) to significantly expand the availability of their ebooks to a vast new range of mobile devices. Ebooks now will be readily accessible beyond the usual ereader devices (Kindle, Nook, iPad, Sony Reader, Kobo, etc.); and that will mean many more future sales for authors, and many more new customers for ebooks.

In other words, I couldn't be publishing HUNTER and future ebooks at a more exciting time.

The second bit of news in the rapidly changing publishing industry concerns the role of book agents. After 25 years of disgust at what is going on in publishing, outspoken indie author Kristine Kathryn Rusch has just published a brutal blog about the the industry -- and about book agents. "I hadn’t realized until a few months ago that the adversarial relationship that sometimes existed between writer and publisher had moved into the agent/author relationship."

This long blog is an eye-opening look behind the closed doors of the Legacy Publishing Industry, by an experienced pro who has studied some 10,000 book contracts and worked at every level in the business. If you are an author, or even a wannabe author, and if you are considering the traditional approach of hiring an agent to negotiate with a publisher, you must read what Ms. Rusch has to say.

Put it this way: These days, neither the publisher nor the so-called "author's agent" is really representing the best interests of the author. More and more, their contract terms are taking writers to the cleaners, in ways that eager, naive authors can't begin to fathom, until it's too late.

Why has this been happening? "The business is changing as we have discussed in these posts for some time now," Rusch explains. "And as the business changes, publishers and agents are running scared. They’re not sure where they will fit in. So they’re trying to reserve as big a piece of the content pie as they possibly can for themselves—at the expense of the content creators. The writers."

Read the entire blog. If you've got an ounce of common sense, you'll want to run like hell from any traditional big-name publisher and any book agent.

But what, then, is your alternative to getting into print? Consider joining the Self-Publishing Revolution, where thousands of writers are beginning to take full control of their own work—and reap the full rewards, too, without any useless or double-crossing intermediaries bleeding them dry. If you need information about this brave new world, start by checking out the blogs by Rusch, her prolific writing partner Dean Wesley Smith, wildly successful self-pub author Joe Konrath, and indie-publishing guru Robin Sullivan.

How deeply has "Atlas Shrugged" penetrated our culture?

2011-05-04T14:45:00.004-04:00

A measure of the success of the "Atlas Shrugged" film is how much it is changing the national conversation.

As I've noted here earlier, the left is so worried about this trend that they launched pre-emptive warfare against the movie, and have continued their assault to a degree that I believe is unprecedented in film criticism. The barrage has been so over-the-top, so unrelenting, that anyone not familiar with Ayn Rand and her novel would rightly wonder, What in hell is going on? If the film, its ideas, the book that inspired it, and the author who wrote the novel, were truly as laughable and insignificant as the Culturati almost unanimously contend, why not just dismiss it and move on?

For instance, the major online leftist rallying point, "Huffington Post," simply cannot shut up about the movie, or Rand, or her books, and especially her ideas. The sneering commentary, mockery, insults, satires, and denunciations pouring forth from that site are relentless. How relentless? I decided to do a Web search on the terms "Atlas Shrugged Huffington Post." See for yourself. The list of linked commentaries and articles goes on and on, page after page.

For a film so supposedly ludicrous, an author so allegedly contemptible, a novel so purportedly laughable, and a philosophy so self-evidently ridiculous, Ms. Huffington's collective seems to be granting it all an amazing level of attention. Methinks the lady (and her minions) doth protest too much.

Tucked between all the punchlines, though, we find commentaries that reveal more clearly what is really going on here. The grandees of the Ruling Class are, frankly, scared. They're scared that Rand's ideas and overarching Narrative -- which constitute the antithesis of everything they represent and hold dear -- are catching on with millions of people. They know that, if this continues, it will pose a grave threat to their entire self-aggrandizing racket. That is why they tried so hard to kill the movie with ridicule, long before it was even released.

And that is also why they, and their intellectual apologists, are trying to drive philosophic wedges between Ayn Rand and her many fans. For instance, we find this supposedly "moderate" college professor instructing conservatives about why they should reject Rand:

But given today's uncertain economic climate and our highly polarized political culture, objectivism is no longer a fringe intellectual force in the Republican party. One can see its influence in the mainstream media and see it on the screens of American cinemas. It's also popular among members of Congress, namely Paul Ryan and Rand Paul.

The objectivist perversion of classical liberalism, and their slavish worship of Rand, is at odds with the American conservative tradition and it threatens its political center, and unless moderates rise up to counter this intellectual poison, intelligent conservative thought will continue to decline and GOP party leadership will continue its drift toward the far right.

Of course, closet liberals, such as this professor, would love nothing better than for the Republican Party to continue on its philosophically anemic, "moderate" march to intellectual bankruptcy and political oblivion, by repudiating the free-market/limited-government agenda championed by Rand. They would love nothing better than for the GOP to continue to select standard-bearers like McCain/Bush/Dole/Snowe/Specter/Collins/Graham/etc. -- "moderates [who will] rise up to counter this intellectual poison." That would truncate boundaries of the political spectrum to conform to their own comfort zone, admitting only those who accept some variant of statist corporatism or welfare-state socialism. And that, in turn, would guarantee the enduring domination of our culture by the bipartisan Ruling Class.

What scares statists is that even influential religious conservatives -- such as Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Cal Thomas -- as well as a number of pragmatic neocons, like Fred Barnes -- have endorsed the "Atlas Shrugged" movie to their legions of fans and followers. Ayn Rand's name and slogans from her books frequently appear on signs and in speeches at Tea Party rallies. As the professor notes, Members of Congress and the judiciary (e.g., Justice Clarence Thomas and Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) also count themselves as fans of Rand's works.

All this is worrisome to leftists, of course. But it also worries "compassionate conservative" statists, such as Michael Gerson, a former George W. Bush speechwriter, who felt compelled to attack the film, its ideas, and their author. "Reaction to Rand," he says accurately, "draws a line in political theory":

Many libertarians trace their inspiration to Rand’s novels, while sometimes distancing themselves from Objectivism. But both libertarians and Objectivists are moved by the mania of a single idea — a freedom indistinguishable from selfishness. This unbalanced emphasis on one element of political theory — at the expense of other public goals such as justice and equal opportunity — is the evidence of a rigid ideology. . . . Conservatives have been generally suspicious of all ideologies, preferring long practice and moral tradition to utopian schemes of left or right. And Rand is nothing if not utopian. In “Atlas Shrugged,” she refers to her libertarian valley of the blessed as Atlantis. It is an attractive place, which does not exist, and those who seek it drown.

But the Randian challenge goes well beyond politics. The film has also forced conservatives, especially religious ones, to wrestle with disquieting, even alarming, philosophical ideas. The Christian conservative Acton Institute, for example, responds with awkward ambivalence to the movie and to Rand's intellectual legacy. Another conservative Christian writer, Colleen Carroll Campbell -- like Michael Gerson, a former presidential speechwriter -- worries deeply about the growing influence of Rand on the right; in fact, she regards it as a "Battle for the Republican Soul":

Rand's resurgent popularity and the rising influence of radical libertarianism in the GOP do not bode well for a Republican party hoping to revive Reagan's big tent. Nor is respect for "the virtue of selfishness," as Rand called it, an adequate principle by which to govern a nation.

Tea Party activists who embrace Rand as the second coming of America's founding fathers forget that as realistic as our founders were about the dangers of intrusive government and the self-interest that motivates citizens, they also were convinced that a free society requires a vibrant moral and religious culture to sustain it. . . . Despite the fiscal focus that characterizes Tea Party gatherings, the movement includes many social conservatives who oppose abortion, embryonic research, euthanasia and the redefinition of marriage as a unisex institution. . . . Their belief in original sin makes them suspicious of the idea that our human condition can be perfected through the right government program or political ideology. . . . It's a sign of our narcissistic times that conservatives who see freedom and goodness as inextricably linked often are treated like skunks at the Grand Old Party, and in American public life in general. And it's all the more reason that Republicans eyeing the White House should spurn Rand's shrill exaltation of selfishness and turn to conservatism's deeper, more life-affirming roots to make their case for change.

Despite such misgivings, Rand's books are getting traction even deep within Christian circles. Let me close with the most amusing (to me) example to date: a feature article in the National Catholic Register, no less, titled -- believe it or not -- "What if the Church Went Galt?" It opens thus:

In the famous novel Atlas Shrugged, the capitalists, maligned and put upon by the overreaching hand of government, all suddenly disappear so that the world would discover how much they really needed the capitalists. They called it “Going Galt” after the man named John Galt who initially vanished.

Today, few groups are more maligned and put upon than Catholics both here in America and around the world. We’ve all heard it suggested that the world would be better off without the Catholic Church.

So this is my response. Not that it could ever happen but what if the Catholic Church went “Galt.” What would happen to the world if the Catholic Church just stopped. Everything.

When a writer in an official Catholic publication feels inspired to draw his metaphors and lessons from Ayn Rand's masterwork, you know that her influence is profound and growing.

And that is why the Ruling Class establishment cannot bring itself to ignore her any longer. The sheer volume and intensity of their intemperate mockery gives the lie to their claims that her ideas aren't worth bothering about. They are bothered, all right -- as they should be -- about a looming philosophic menace to their shaky hold on our culture.

Reports of the death of books are greatly exaggerated

2011-05-04T12:02:00.000-04:00

Book publishing and sales are not in decline. However, the forms of their delivery are changing radically, as I have pointed out here repeatedly.

Editor and publisher Peter Osnos, writing in The Atlantic:

Robert Darnton, the Harvard librarian and our preeminent writer about books from the perspective of history, has a fascinating piece in the current issue of The Chronicle of Higher Education that, among other observations, demolishes the notion that books overall are in inexorable decline. Darnton quotes 2009 numbers provided by Bowker, the data agency for publishing, which records 288,355 new and reissued titles and speculates that the numbers for 2010 and 2011 will show continuing increases; a further 764,448 titles in 2009 fell into a "nontraditional" category of self-published, micro-niche, and print-on-demand books, according to Bowker. "However it is measured," Darnton wrote, "the population of books is increasing, not decreasing and certainly not dying". . . .

In fact, a recent Wall Street Journal survey on self-publishing concluded that e-book titles priced as low as 99 cents are making an increasing impact on the market. Jeffrey Trachtenberg, the newspaper's respected publishing reporter, wrote: "As digital sales surge, publishers are casting a worried eye towards the previously scorned self-published market. Unlike five years ago, when self-published writers rarely saw their works on the same shelf as the industry's biggest names, the low cost of digital publishing coupled with Twitter and other social-networking tools, has enabled previously unknown writers to make a splash". . . .

For those of us in all aspects of publishing, these are heady times--which is a mix of dizzying, exciting, and to be candid, somewhat intimidating, given the pace of transformation and the unknowable consequences of so dramatic a period of upheaval. One outcome is certain--there will be books and they will be read, one way or another.

Read it all.

Leading environmentalist admits that movement is "lost"

2011-05-04T11:28:00.000-04:00

George Monbiot, a leading environmentalist writer, now acknowledges that the environmentalist movement's policy prescriptions are intellectually incoherent and utterly contradictory. Yet he still clings bitterly to the false Malthusian economic Narrative that underpins environmentalist theory.

Walter Russell Mead comments:

This is an awesome admission of categorical intellectual, political and moral failure. For two decades greens have arrogated to themselves the authority of science and wrapped themselves in the arrogant certainty of self-righteous contempt for those who oppose them. They have equated skepticism about their incoherent and contradictory policy proposals with hatred of science and attacked their critics as the soulless hired shills of the oil companies, happy to ruin humanity for the sake of some corporate largesse.

Monbiot has worked his way through to a cogent description of the dead end the global green movement has reached, but he has not yet diagnosed the cause. In particular, he remains a staunch Malthusian. . . . Economic growth is a cancer, in this view. Its bad effects are permanent and cumulative, its blessings are evanescent and ultimately trivial.

Malthusianism is a religious conviction that desperately needs to think of itself as a science. From Thomas Malthus and his mathematical certainties to Paul Ehrlich with his famine timetables and the Club of Rome with its ‘scientific’ predictions of resource exhaustion, Malthusians have made confident predictions about the future and claimed scientific authority for statements that turned out to be contemptibly silly. That is the brutal fate that often awaits people who can’t keep the boundaries between science and religion straight.

It is happening on a massive and humiliating scale to the world’s greens today.

OSAMA BIN LADEN KILLED BY U.S. FORCES

2011-05-01T23:11:00.008-04:00

~~Blown up~~ Shot down by our special operations guys in a town outside of Islamabad, Pakistan.

Fantastic news. Justice is done.

UPDATE: In the midst of my private celebration and salutes to all involved in the killing of this monster, one bit of sober reflection -- and that has to do with President Obama's statements telling the world that bin Laden's corpse will be treated with "all respect" in accordance with "Muslim practice."

First, I can't fault the theory behind the alleged burial at sea: Don't leave around a burial site for this bastard, so that it becomes an Islamist martyr shrine.

On the other hand, this business of treating his corpse with all "respect" in accordance "with Muslim tradition" is completely hypocritical.

Didn't President Obama himself say that Obama was not a true Muslim? Hasn't his argument all along been that bin Laden was a phony Muslim who had "hijacked Islam" -- and that no "true Muslim" would so warp the "religion of peace" by committing mass murders?

WELL, MR. PRESIDENT: WHICH IS IT?

If he is not a Muslim -- if Islam is truly a "religion of peace" -- then you don't have to "respect" the carcass of this animal. You could show by your indifferent treatment of it (perhaps a public display to prove that he's really dead) that you do not take bin Laden to be a true Muslim, nor should the world.

But by these "respectful" acts, you do in fact treat him as a true Muslim -- which in effect elevates a mass-murderer as a representative and member in good standing of the Muslim faith. If so, then what becomes of its own standing as "the religion of peace"?

So, Mr President, which is it? Should the Muslim world believe your statements, or your actions, concerning bin Laden's status as a Muslim -- and therefore of Islam's status as a "religion of peace"?

Latest wrinkle in self-publishing: "enhanced ebooks"

2011-04-30T10:52:00.002-04:00

As many of you know, I'm a big advocate of self-publishing, especially via ebooks, and on platforms such as Amazon.com. The possibilities that new do-it-yourself technology are opening for authors and readers are stunning.

Consider the emerging opportunities in "enhanced ebooks": "You can incorporate mixed media, such as video, audio, pictures, maps and interactive content. Best of all it's in full color, so it allows for more vibrant content."

Believe me, you will not recognize what a "book" will become in the near future. Imagine reading an ebook spy thriller, then being able to click on links that provide full dossiers on the characters, or Google Map street views of locations, encyclopedia entries on weapons and gadgets, video or audio interviews with the author . . . The possibilities are boundless.

Exciting times ahead, folks!

Meditations after viewing "Atlas Shrugged" for the second time

2011-04-29T12:24:00.007-04:00

I went to see "Atlas Shrugged, Part One" for the second time last night, this time with my wife, who saw it for the first time. And I realized several important things.

The first is about the role of preconceptions and expectations in shaping one's enjoyment of a book or film.

There's a world of difference between the perceptions of a typical audience member, and what someone schooled in film production and technique will "see" and appreciate. And I believe that explains -- if only in part -- the huge divergence between the opinions of typical filmgoers to "Atlas Shrugged, Part One" and those of many critics and reviewers.

The typical audience member is looking simply for a good, absorbing story, told effectively enough to hold his interest. The experienced film reviewer or critic, though, will focus far more on the "how" of the film: on cinematic technique, including the nuances of the writing, dialogue, direction, camera-work, etc. At least, technical aspects will enter into his awareness and consideration far more, and have a much greater impact on his enjoyment, than they will for the ordinary movie fan.

This is analogous to how I, as a writer and editor, might read and enjoy novels, as opposed to how most readers do. When I read popular fiction, I wince frequently at "head-hopping" points of view, at adverbial "tags" in dialogue, at unimaginative descriptions and superficial characterizations. However, I also realize that most readers haven't much of a sense of these or other writing issues. They read for the story. The story either holds them or it doesn't. If it does, they forgive or overlook all sorts of technical shortcomings -- if they are even aware of them as such. This explains why some novels are hugely popular, even though they come up short as "literature."

It puts things into perspective to recognize, however, that method is never an end in itself. The point of narrative-driven arts, such as novels and films, is to tell a story: The story is what the audience wants. And the point of technique and method is only to serve the storytelling. They consist of an array of tools and methods used by the artists to tell the tale more effectively -- that's all.

Yes, you may fail to tell a great story effectively because of your technical deficiencies as an artist. On the other hand, however, you may be a master of technique and still be a lousy storyteller, because you may have a lousy story to tell. David Lean, for example, was a consummate director whose body of work includes many film classics. But even bringing all his artistry to bear on "A Passage to India" could not salvage it from being an interminably boring trifle.

Again, for the artist, the point of fiction-writing or movie-making is not to demonstrate one's mastery of The Rules of his profession, then to dazzle his audience with his technical prowess. In fact, it is poor artistry to show off one's technique to the extent that it calls attention to itself -- thus distracting the audience from being "lost in the story." If I'm watching a film and constantly thinking such things as, "Wow! Look at that tracking shot!" -- that is flawed storytelling. Again, the point should be to tell a good story effectively. If you have done that, your work stands up as competent art.

So last evening, I went into "Atlas Shrugged" trying to shed my preconceptions and expectations and view it as pure storytelling. And I found that I liked it much better the second time around, because I was more able to look at it as a work independent of the novel upon which it was based. I thought it was effective storytelling that held up well on its own merits.

Was I still aware of cinematic shortcomings? Of course. On technical grounds, I could have suggested a number of changes that I think would have enhanced the storytelling. But, in answer to the basic question: Was the film, standing completely in isolation from the novel, an absorbing, entertaining, effective presentation of the story of "Atlas Shrugged"? -- my answer is an unequivocal "yes."

My wife is a better test case, since she has never read the novel, and the only way she could have perceived the film is as a stand-alone piece of storytelling. She also liked it, very much. She followed the plot completely, found it entertaining, thought the acting was good, felt that its look and special effects were impressive, and found the message to be disquieting and persuasive. "It was better than I thought it would be," she said to me as we left the theater. She plans to recommend it to her friends.

My wife is, I believe, far more representative of most film-goers than either I or film critics are. Those of us who know something about film-making, and who know and love the novel, are aware of many technical issues that could have been improved upon to make the film even more effective. We also know the novel intimately and are aware of the many divergences between the film and its source material, including psychological subtleties and missing subplots. We view all of these as lost opportunities. We forget that most viewers are not burdened with the baggage of that knowledge.

Anyway, in my first viewing, I couldn't distance myself from that wider context and step into the shoes of somebody seeing the film without any of my preconceptions and expectations. I was able to do that much more this time. As a result, my verdict has changed for the better. I think "Atlas Shrugged, Part One" stands on its own as good, effective, entertaining storytelling -- and thought-provoking storytelling, too. I move it up a notch on a scale of 1-10, giving it an 8.

The second viewing confirmed one other thing for me: Critics who have been lambasting the film are clearly reacting more against its Narrative -- its heroic worldview and individualist values -- than to any cinematic shortcomings. The film holds up far better technically than many films that win their approval -- including films that are not only technically poor, but utterly depraved. It is a good film of a great novel, and absolutely undeserving of the vile pounding it has received from the corrupt cultural Establishment.

If you want some examples of what I mean, consider the fact that for "Atlas" the combined score of critics on the "Rotten Tomatoes" website is just 9 percent positive -- while their combined score for the laughably pretentious, psychologically preposterous, ponderously paced, incoherently plotted, and otherwise completely stupid "Eyes Wide Shut" was 77 percent positive. ("Eyes Wide Shut" managed to achieve what I had previously thought to be impossible: It made sex excruciatingly boring.) Consider just one prominent critic, Roger Ebert, and his respective takes on both films. Read what he wrote about "Eyes Wide Shut"; compare that with what he wrote about "Atlas"; then tell me whether he is responding to technique of narration, or to clashing Narratives.

I could say the same for the wretchedly degenerate "Blue Velvet," a David Lynch exercise in sadism, foul-mouthed depravity, and psychological lunacy that transported 91 percent of the critics into rhetorical orgasms. Some sample comments, all approving: "One of the most subversive films of the 1980s, delving into the corrupt underside of the then-idealized faux innocence of the 1950s with an almost alarming ferocity." "A beautiful film about sickness, a funny film about degeneracy." And perhaps most revealing: "An unsettling film that depicts the moral rot underlying the American Dream through arresting cinematic images that are at once realistic and surreal."

Consider these comments. Then consider what "Atlas Shrugged" is all about. Ask yourself whether these creatures are merely focused on upholding The High Standards of Cinema -- or whether they are, in fact, postmodern propagandists who see their mission as subverting uniquely American values.

The "Atlas Shrugged" controversy is about much, much more than film criticism, my friends. Make no mistake: This film is positioned dead-center on the front lines of a raging cultural war: a war to the death between the American Narrative that has led to our nation's greatness, and the Nihilistic Narrative of those who wish to obliterate it all.

You can show what side you're on, this week. Go see "Atlas Shrugged, Part One" while it's still in the theaters. If you've already seen it, see it again. It's a film that grows on you with repeated viewings. And it bears a Narrative that urgently needs to be championed and spread through our ailing culture.

Latest leftist outrage: "Superman" renounces his American citizenship

2011-04-28T14:07:00.003-04:00

Whenever I claim that leftists in the U.S. fundamentally hate America and what it stands for, I am accused of exaggeration (and worse). The defenders and enablers of the left protest that they are simply "multicultural" and trying to recognize and celebrate the values of "other" cultures and nations as being just as valid as our own.

Let's leave aside the absurd claim that "other" cultures and nations are as good as America. Are U.S. leftists just "multicultural" relativists? Or do they actually hate their native land, its values, and its institutions?

Consider how hard the Culturati struggled to defend our current president for sitting in the pews of Jeremiah Wright's church for years, in mute approval, while the "reverend" denounced America in the most ugly terms. Then consider the same Culturati's vicious gang assault on the "Atlas Shrugged" movie, their collateral smears of Ayn Rand and her ideas -- and their undisguised repudiation of the American individualist values that film champions. It will be even harder for them to disguise their true motives when (not "if") they defend the latest outrage against a symbolic American icon.

I'm referring to the fact that the Politically Correct heirs to the DC Comics "Superman" franchise have decided to transform the caped champion of "truth, justice, and the American way" into an unAmerican citizen of the planet.

Believe it or not, "Superman" is now renouncing his American citizenship.

Here is the captioned dialogue from the forthcoming comic book:

SUPERMAN: ". . .I intend to speak before the United Nations tomorrow and inform them that I am renouncing my U.S. citizenship."

SECOND CHARACTER: "What?"

SUPERMAN: "I'm tired of having my actions construed as instruments of U.S. policy. 'Truth, justice, and the AMERICAN way' -- it's just not ENOUGH anymore."

No, we can't have American kids growing up to believe in, well, America anymore. America, and what it uniquely represents, just isn't "enough." Instead, our children must be taught to think of themselves as citizens of the world, holding their primary allegiance to the United Nations -- not to the United States.

Name me one other place on the planet where contempt for one's own nation is celebrated as the hallmark of moral virtue and intellectual sophistication.

This is not the first time that comic-book writers have, symbolically, renounced their allegiance to America. A while back, they obliterated "Captain America," temporarily morphing him into the unAmerican "Nomad" before returning him to his old identity (only after the writers scored their anti-U.S.-government political points).

And lest you dismiss this as much ado about nothing, understand that comic-book heroes are pure, idealized embodiments of a society's dominant values. Their stories are overt manifestations of our reigning cultural Narratives, which I've discussed previously.

Simply put, many of those now writing comic books for kids hate the American individualist Narrative. Alienated from that Narrative and the values it incorporates, they've spent years trying subtly (and sometimes, not so subtly) to undercut the characters and themes that represent it -- characters and themes that have inspired generations of children past.

Now, egged on and enabled by the cultural/intellectual/artistic elite of our Ruling Class -- and meeting little intellectual opposition -- they are openly celebrating their antipathy for the one nation on earth that has allowed them to enrich themselves, and gleefully vandalizing its icons.

[UPDATE: That this is not the work of a single warped individual, but represents the worldview of the whole rotten cultural establishment, can be found here, in this contemptible Wired piece by Scott Thill:

The Man of Steel throws down in outer space against a continually misguided Lex Luthor, who’s finally rewarded for his boundless ambition by becoming a petulant god. Supes also throws a pizza party with Lois Lane for his Kryptonian pals, who crowd his couch while chowing grub and chewing scenery. He talks cosmology and philosophy with an interstellar deity beset by guilt over civilizations he was perhaps too selfish to save, and goes head-to-head with a one-time pro athlete who’s become a superheroic show-off.

It’s just another day in the life of Earth’s most recognizable comics immortal, in a landmark issue penned by all-stars from film, television and comics. Previewed in the gallery above, Action Comics No. 900 features stories penned by Doctor Who’s Paul Cornell, Lost’s Damon Lindelof, Superman: The Movie director Richard Donner, The Dark Knight screenwriter David S. Goyer and DC Comics’ chief creative officer, Geoff Johns. . . .

In an age rife with immigration paranoia, it’s refreshing to see an alien refugee tell the United States that it’s as important to him as any other country on Earth — which in turn is as important to Superman as any other planet in the multiverse.

The genius of Superman is that he belongs to everyone, for the dual purposes of peace and protection. He’s above ephemeral geopolitics and nationalist concerns, a universal agent unlike any other found in pop culture.

The finest moment in Action Comics No. 900 comes when Goyer makes that exquisitely clear to everyone.]

Let me dare to resurrect the one word that best describes what this represents -- certainly in motive, if not in law:

Treason.

If you're a parent, I suggest that you begin to monitor your child's reading and viewing habits, in order to keep such anti-American garbage out of your home.

Meanwhile, all of us should protest publicly these nihilistic assaults on American icons and values. Because a lot more is at stake here than the fate of a childrens' comic-book hero.

UPDATE #2: More sickening is this motive: cashing in on international anti-Americanism.

Good news: John Aglialoro Bounces Back

2011-04-27T23:55:00.000-04:00

This is more like it! After initially venting his frustration and disappointment in the media, John Aglialoro has bounced back and vowed to make "Atlas Shrugged" Parts 2 and 3.

In fact, said John Aglialoro, the co-producer and financier, it's the monolithic view from critics that say the movie stinks that is motivating him to make Parts 2 and 3, he told The Hollywood Reporter.

And he defended his film Wednesday by accusing professional film reviewers of political bias. How else, he asks, to explain their distaste for a film that is liked by the audience? At Rottentomatoes.com, 7,400 people gave it an average 85% score. . . .

"They're lemmings," he said. "What's their fear of Ayn Rand? They hate this woman. They hate individualism.

"I'm going to get a picture of Ebert and Travers and the rest of them so I can wake up in the morning and they'll be right there. They're revitalizing me with their outrageousness". . . .

He said he's sticking to his plan to release Part 2 on April 15, 2012, and Part 3 on April 15, 2013, though gathering the same talent and crew might be a problem.

"The critics killed it so badly that agents may tell their clients they shouldn't be associated with this thing," he said. "I've got to give it to the critics. They won this battle, but they will not win the war. The message has been told in Part 1, and it will be told in Parts 2 and 3."

Now, that's the spirit!

"Marching for Frogs"

2011-04-27T09:30:00.000-04:00

In the April 27 issue of The American Spectator, I report on the latest environmentalist scare campaign.

But will this one have "legs"?

"Atlas Shrugged" movie update

2011-04-27T01:58:00.000-04:00

John Aglialoro, producer of the "Atlas Shrugged" film, is quoted in the Los Angeles Times today as expressing bitter disappointment over the critical and commercial reception of the movie:

"Critics, you won," said John Aglialoro, the businessman who spent 18 years and more than $20 million of his own money to make, distribute and market "Atlas Shrugged: Part 1," which covers the first third of Rand's dystopian novel. "I’m having deep second thoughts on why I should do Part 2."

"Atlas Shrugged" was the top-grossing limited release in its opening weekend, generating $1.7 million on 299 screens and earning a respectable $5,640 per screen. But the box office dropped off 47% in the film's second week in release even as "Atlas Shrugged" expanded to 425 screens, and the movie seemed to hold little appeal for audiences beyond the core group of Rand fans to whom it was marketed.

Aglialoro attributed the box office drop-off to "Atlas Shrugged's" poor reviews.

Personally, I regarded the film as quite good, though not great -- certainly not deserving the excoriating reviews it received. Some sites and writers simply would not let up; they pounded the film repeatedly, looking for excuses to pile on at every opportunity.

But this disproportionate bashing is revealing. Ask yourself how many other "mediocre" or even "bad" films have ever generated this level of untempered wrath, raging vituperation, incessant insults, and unrestrained gloating over their artistic or commercial shortcomings. Does this not suggest that something much deeper is going on?

If the film's critics (professional and amateur) truly believed that it was merely mediocre, then what explains their unrelenting, over-the-top spewing of venom? Similarly, if Rand and her ideas were simply silly, wouldn't her intellectual opponents just dismiss her lightly, without such ado? To the contrary, however: A Google search for reviews and commentary about Ayn Rand and Atlas Shrugged over the past several weeks shows that, for the commentariat, this was not just another opportunity to review another film, or to comment on a novelist and thinker; this was all-out warfare.

But why?

This earlier post suggests my own interpretation of the Culturati's otherwise baffling fixation on damning, mocking, and repudiating Ayn Rand, her ideas, her books, and this film. For Rand was not just any other philosopher or artist, nor is she treated as such. Ayn Rand was a Romantic visionary who spent her life crafting, articulating, and objectifying in fiction a new Narrative to guide our lives: a Narrative counter to those that have held humanity in their grip for thousands of years. If you grasp the all-consuming significance that Narratives play in our lives, then you will understand that everything is at stake when Narratives clash.

The Randian Narrative -- "of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute" -- challenges the Narratives that have dominated thousands of years of human history. For those wedded to the latter, her vision represents a grave threat to everything they are, everything they have, and everything they seek. This threat goes beyond politics or economic theories; it encompasses their most personal values, aspirations, ideals, lifestyles, vested interests, relationships -- the works.

It boils down to this: If Ayn Rand is essentially right, then most of what society has been committed to for centuries is utterly wrong. And that is why they could not permit themselves to give the "Atlas Shrugged" film a fair shake. It had to be driven off the screens of American theaters.

It is a shame that the movie is not even better than it is, because its flaws allow Rand's haters to hide their true motives beneath the mask of high-minded aesthetic criticism. Had it been a great film on purely cinematic grounds, then those motives would have been laid bare even more starkly.

But they are clear enough.

In any case, John Aglialoro should not long lament this vicious response to his work. Like Rand herself, he was challenging much more than Hollywood. His achievement in the face of overwhelming challenges and rampant hostility is extraordinary. He should take pride in the fact that he is introducing millions to Rand's name, ideas, and masterwork, many for the first time. He has aroused the curiosity of countless individuals who now will read the novel upon which his film is based. And the consequences will be far-reaching.

I am well-enough acquainted with John to know that this was one of his major objectives. Well, then: mission accomplished. I hope that once he has had time to gain further perspective, he will realize the full extent of what he has achieved. At that point, I hope he will consider producing the second and third installments of this grand story. Because I am confident that many others, inspired by his vision and valor, will step up to help him.

As for me, I plan to go see the film once again tonight -- and I will bring along some friends, too.

Nook Color Becomes a Full-On Android Tablet

2011-04-26T19:01:00.002-04:00

Folks, I love free-market competition. And with this great move, Barnes & Noble -- which has been circling the drain -- may very well bounce back and become a serious competitor to Amazon for the ereader market:

Barnes & Noble has touted its Nook Color as “the reader’s tablet” since the product’s inception. But after the company announced the launch of an Android OS update and extended features on the device this week, we’re not sure what to call it anymore.

E-reader? Tablet? E-tablet?

Version 1.2 of the Nook Color’s firmware launched Monday morning, bringing Android OS 2.2 (Froyo) to existing users of the e-reader tablet. The software includes expansions to web surfing on the device, including Adobe Flash and Air support, as well as the ability to receive e-mail.

The company also announced the launch of the Nook App store. Customers are now able to download and use apps on their Nook Color devices, while still being able to purchase books from the Barnes & Noble reading catalog. . . .

Read it all.

I love this because, as a writer, it offers me another vast and growing marketplace for peddling my future ebooks. The Nook Color keeps B&N in the ereader ball game with Amazon's Kindle. The financial pressure now moves to Apple, whose iPad is priced much higher. If Apple is compelled to slash iPad prices to compete with the Nook, that will even further expand the marketplace for ebooks, and accelerate the demand for them.

Archive of my articles at Breitbart's "Big Government"

2011-04-26T08:39:00.001-04:00

I've published a number of pieces at Breitbart's "Big Government" site over the past year. For anyone interested, here is the page where all my articles are archived.

"'Atlas Shrugged' Changed My Life"

2011-04-25T10:12:00.001-04:00

I wrote this piece about my first encounter with Atlas Shrugged as an editorial commentary some years ago, in The New Individualist. Now it has been reposted online.

Some of you might find this bit of autobiography amusing.

Reform the Ph.D. diploma mill

2011-04-25T09:17:00.002-04:00

Higher education has been undergoing its own "bubble," with billions in cash (often governmental cash) inflating the number of graduates -- and their expectations of doing well in the job market. But economic reality is sobering for many who spend years getting advanced degrees, only to find that they can't get jobs in their fields when they graduate.

From Nature:

The system of PhD education in the United States and many other countries is broken and unsustainable, and needs to be reconceived. In many fields, it creates only a cruel fantasy of future employment that promotes the self-interest of faculty members at the expense of students. The reality is that there are very few jobs for people who might have spent up to 12 years on their degrees. . . .

"Higher education in the United States has long been the envy of the world, but that is changing. The technologies that have transformed financial markets and the publishing, news and entertainment industries are now disrupting the education system. In the coming years, growing global competition for the multibillion-dollar education market will increase the pressure on US universities, just when public and private funding is decreasing."

I take special note of the sentence, "The technologies that have transformed financial markets and the publishing, news and entertainment industries are now disrupting the education system." Yes, indeed. Campuses may eventually become analogous to "big box" chain bookstores: relics of an earlier day, before a good education could be delivered electronically.

And more here, where this passage stood out: "Finally, it may be time to encourage some young people to forgo graduate education and enter the workforce. Some companies actually prefer to hire recent college graduates—or even undergraduates—because they believe that PhD students are not well-prepared for real-world jobs."

Duh.

"Are You Dense?"

2011-04-24T12:48:00.000-04:00

Joe Konrath, the Pied Piper of self-publishing, asks this question of those authors who still defend traditional ("legacy") publishing houses and dismiss self-publishing. And he answers it here, in a passionate and persuasive defense of the self-publishing revolution.

If you are a writer, and you wonder what is all the recent fuss concerning self-publishing ebooks, rather than seeking a traditional agent and publisher, then Joe is the guy you should read -- and this blog post is a great place to begin. After you do, check previous posts on his blog; they're eye-openers.

For similar reasons, two other must-read blogs for authors are Robin Sullivan's "Write to Publish," and Dean Wesley Smith's. They'll introduce you to an amazing and exciting new world for authors.

Great profile of thriller writer Brad Thor

2011-04-23T13:42:00.003-04:00

Just read this fine profile piece from Townhall Magazine -- now reprinted here in The Blaze -- of a friend, a great guy, and a hell of a good writer, #1 NYT thriller author Brad Thor.

If you haven't read Brad's thrillers, dive on in and find out what you've been missing. To start his "Scot Harvath" series at the beginning, the one to pick up first is The Lions of Lucerne.

Let's Make Earth Day a Religious Holiday

2011-04-22T12:41:00.001-04:00

Since April 2001, I have annually reprinted this back-handed salute to "Earth Day." Enjoy.

Let's Make Earth Day a Religious Holiday

On April 22, millions will dutifully engage in the now-familiar rituals and incantations of America’s fastest-growing religion.

In public places, they will gather to listen to sermons . . . about the sins of human selfishness, about redemption through self-abasement, about the duty to exercise stewardship of the earth.

In schools, they will indoctrinate their children in the gospel according to John . . . John Muir, that is.

In their homes, they will engage in symbolic acts of self-denial . . . by digging through germ-laden garbage for recyclables, by denying themselves the pleasures of eating meat, and by setting their thermostats below the sinful level of human comfort.

The cause for this mass religious outpouring is, of course, Earth Day. In just a few decades, it has become an unofficial holy day, displacing in the hearts of our countrymen (and in the memories of those who publish calendars) such reactionary occasions as Jefferson’s birthday.

This once bothered me. As a journalist, I’ve investigated environmental scares, from ozone depletion to global warming to pesticides on food. All proved to be unconscionable bunkum.

But fear is easier to peddle than facts. Today, carcinogenic corporations are the stock heavies in Julia Roberts films and children’s cartoons.

The rise of environmentalism isn’t surprising. A culture taught to venerate Eden as its Ideal couldn’t sustain sympathy for such icons of capitalism and technology as Manhattan or Microsoft.

So I’ve bowed to the inevitable triumph of faith over reason. Since environmentalism has become our national religion anyway, I now urge Congress to declare Earth Day an official religious holiday.

This is no frivolous proposal. Consider the common characteristics of religions, and ask yourself if environmentalism qualifies:

Religions typically claim that human nature is selfish and sinful. So does environmentalism. John Muir, co-founder of the Sierra Club, denounced men as “selfish, conceited creatures.” George Perkins Marsh, another founding father of environmentalism, described men as “brute destroyers” who “destroy the balance which nature has established.” To some environmentalists, people are – at best – a trivial part of a vast “ecosystem,” no more important than lizards, trees, or rocks

Religions traditionally criticize human reason, and extol faith. So does environmentalism. In his book Earth in the Balance, former Vice President Al Gore excoriates our “rational, detached, scientific intellect” as “too often arrogant, unfeeling, uncaring.” His book’s closing paragraph is a pious call to faith.

Religions require people to sacrifice their happiness to something larger. So does environmentalism. Do you have personal plans for your future? Scrap them now: “We must make the rescue of the environment the central organizing principle of civilization,” Al Gore writes. He would demand “wrenching” changes “that will affect almost every aspect of our lives together on this planet.”

This malignant view of man and his works has won millions of converts. A 1997 survey published in American Demographics found that fully a fourth of all Americans “see nature as sacred, want to stop corporate polluters, are suspicious of big business, are interested in voluntary simplicity, and are willing to pay to clean up the environment and stop global warming.”

That’s amazing growth for a new faith in just three decades. At this rate, environmentalism will supplant all rival religions in a few more years.

So why fight it? Environmentalism is already a fixture of federal, state, and local laws, enforced by an army of bureaucrats. Declaring Earth Day to be an official religious holiday will simply acknowledge the obvious.

As for those few who cringe at this prospect -– take heart. Once environmentalism becomes officially recognized as a religion, at least we’ll have some First Amendment protections.

We may even be able to insist –- on grounds of separation of church and state -– that the government stop shoving environmentalism down our throats, through smothering regulations, public school indoctrination, and insufferable sermons from politicians such as Al Gore.

"Big 6" Publishers Cheating Authors Out of Royalties

2011-04-21T20:44:00.000-04:00

There's no gentle way to put this: A number of "Big 6" publishers are cheating authors out of their royalties, big time. And a blogger has caught them in this fraud. Read the sorry details here, and in this follow-up post.

This is dynamite stuff -- and all the more reason for writers to self-publish.

Why All the Fuss About "Atlas Shrugged"?

2011-04-21T12:44:00.003-04:00

Here's a web page that answers that question. It also links to a number of my own writings about Atlas Shrugged -- including essays on the ideas and literary merits of the novel, an internal timeline of the story events, and a list of its characters.

Not just for Rand geeks, this page is also for those simply curious to discover why there's so much enduring controversy about this unusual story and its author.

UPDATE: 423 theaters now, and climbing rapidly. Check for a theater near you.