Undead Press: They’ll Add Shit to Your Story.

At least two authors of my acquaintance have spoken up this week about a publisher, Undead Press, and an editor, Anthony Giangregorio, who accepted their stories for anthologies and published them after making major changes—to include changing the name of the story (a move of debatable immorality, to be sure), and adding in a touch of RAPE (much less debatable!) in another—without any consultation with the authors. The authors didn’t even know the damage was done until after the books went to print because they didn’t receive galley proofs—not even electronic ones. I submit the blogs of authors Alyn Day and Mandy DeGeit for your consideration:

The anthology was released under the name of a different publisher, Undead Press, and my story was no longer my story. It had been butchered. I sat in my livingroom with one of the 6 copies I had purchased, flipping through the pages, eager to see my words in print… only they weren’t my words. It wasn’t even my TITLE. Parts of my story had been cut out, names and details had been changed, things I was never made aware of and had never agreed to. –Alyn Day

They turned a non-gendered character into a boy, they named the best friend, they created a memory for the main character about animal abuse. They added a suggestion of rape at the end… –Mandy DeGeit

If you’ve been around the block a bit as an author, the rest of this post is TL;DR. Please just disseminate as widely as possible so that everyone knows who sucks and why. But since the authors in question are new, and got sucked in by a predator, and because I, in my larval stage, had a near miss with similar idiocy, I want to say a few things to the new authors who may be reading my blog.

  • What Happened Was Bullshit.All of it. The only changes an editor has the ethical right to make without consulting the author are grammatical and typographical corrections. Plain and simple. As an editor, I’ve been privileged to edit authors’ first published stories and the work of Bram Stoker Award winners, plus everything in between. I am not afraid to offer suggestions to any of them. But all they are is suggestions. If an author doesn’t like my suggestion, these are the ONLY options:
    • The author makes the changes;
    • The author says not happening;
    • The editor says I’d rather have the author’s preferred version than nothing and takes the submission without suggestions being used;
    • The editor says it’s my way or the highway.

Note the distinct absence of Editor Does Whatever the Fuck he Wants with the Story.

  • You Should Always Get a Galley. I’ve NEVER had to ask for one. EVER. My publishers have always sent me a copy of what the finished work is going to look like before going to print. I began editing my first anthology a mere three months after my first serious publication, and published the book six months after that. Guess what? I sent the contributors a galley before it went to publication. I was a NOOB and I understood that concept. If this assclown is calling himself a publisher, he should have understood that, too. Which brings me to my last point.
  • It’s Only Your Fault if you Get Fooled Again the Same Way. I knew from the get-go that authors get galleys. It’s not any new author’s fault if they didn’t know that. Some people have a different learning curve, and honestly, I was surrounded by an amazing group of mentors and fellow authors from Day One. The blame for this shit is firmly on the shoulders of Undead Press and Mr. Giangregorio. If you call yourself an editor, or hang your shingle out as a publisher, you are saying  I have my shit together. I want to enter into a professional arrangement with authors and I know how to do this. An author has a right to expect this of a publisher and/or editor—though, granted, those of us who’ve been around a bit know how to smell a rat. If I had made a mistake like this during my first stint as editor, the only appropriate response would have been a sincere public apology and immediate implementation of a solution.

Having said that, I’d like to conclude by asking Mr. Giangregorio to come on out—in the comments section of this blog, even, if he’d like—and discuss what he’s going to do to make this shit right.

This entry was posted in Featured, Publishing and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comments

  1. Lee Allen says:

    “Debatable immorality” aside (wouldn’t “morality” have sounded better there?), the fact is she signed a contract that said the editor had the right to make edits. She signed this. Edits were made. I have not compared the two versions, but as I watch this all unfold, even if the story was changed for the worse, she shouldn’t have signed the contract. But she did. Perhaps she didn’t read it? To cry about it now seems more than a little ridiculous. Also, this talk of “ethical” rights is laughable in the publishing world, as righteous as it seems. There are contracts instead of assumptions about ethics for very good reasons.

    -L.A.

    1. admin says:

      In Hawaii, it is legal for my 30-year old self to bang a 16-year old girl, too. Doesn’t make it right.

      Also, I’m open to examples of legitimate, established publishers adding paragraphs, rape scenes, etc. to an author’s work without their consent. If we’re going to get into legality, I’m not out of line to ask for precedent, I don’t think. Show me.

      1. admin fart says:

        Of course it makes it right. Most people decide where they want to live based on economic and constitutional constraints.

        Constitutional constraints are built upon that specific section of humanity’s morals and perspectives. You can’t disseminate what is “wrong or right” with any validity except where you’ve chosen to live and work. Obviously the people of Hawaii believe it’s right for a old woman/man to bang a 16 year old boy/girl. They, as humans, have decided that it’s right and so for all concerned parties, it is right.

        The exception would be in a humanities situation where a majority of people do not agree with the laws where they reside and are thus rebelling against a regime (like, say, the Holocaust).

        In the situation presented, the writer created a constitutional microcosm for herself when she signed that contract. Whatever happened after that, so long as it was within the bounds of that contract, is of course “right”.

        1. admin says:

          You’re saying that it’s right to sleep with a 16-year old girl in Hawaii because the majority of Hawaiians think it’s okay. Alright. I can appreciate that argument. Backbone of democratic society and all.

          Judging from the outpouring of support for DeGeit and Day, and of condemnation for Undead Press, it seems the majority of authors, editors, etc. think what Anthony Giangregorio did is wrong.

    2. Michael Rowe says:

      So odd, Lee. I’ve been writing professionally for nearly thirty years now, and never once at any point in that time would I ever have considered that signing a contract that allowed the editor to….well, for lack of a better word, edit, would allow him or her to rewrite my fiction. Or that any changes to the story would not be run by me first. What’s “more than a little ridiculous” is blaming her for this situation and proposing the preposterous notion that she signed away her rights when she signed the contract with this person.

  2. Lee Allen says:

    You do understand there’s nothing illegal about putting the line “editor reserves the right to make edits,” right? Who would sign this? (outside of Hollywood, of course, where Undead Press’ contract would be seen as incredibly generous). I thought you wanted to warn new writers. Instead you want them to what? Try to gauge the good hearts of strangers? How about tell them to read a contract or don’t sign it. And when did I talk of “legitimate, established publishers”? You’re so caught up in how terribly unfair this all is that you ignore what caused it. This would be a fun court case. You would be all over the map with arcane state laws, and a shoddy editor would hold up the contract with his hook and laugh all the way home.

    1. Jeff Erno says:

      I am not sure that you’re correct about this being legal. Although I do not know the precedent, it seems to me that the pertinent issue is what the word “edit” means. I bet the court would use industry standard to determine what editing entails. Changing an author’s story by adding blocks of text, revising the title, or rewriting the characters, is definitely not standard procedure.

      The reason I say this is because I work as an editor, and I’m also the author of thirteen novels. My works have been published by a variety of small-house publishers, and although the editing process differs slightly with each publisher, there is one constant: the galley proof.

      As an editor, I am in direct communication with the author during the editing process. Any and all revisions made to the manuscript are tracked, and the author receives a “marked up” copy of their manuscript upon completion. At that point, the author goes through the manuscript and accepts or rejects every single change. After the author and editor agree on a finished project, the manuscript is forwarded to the publisher. At this stage, it either goes through a secondary edit, or it goes to galley. Even during the galley stage, the author is involved. She receives a copy of the galley proof, and she has a certain number of days (usually up to thirty, depending upon the scheduled release date) to request changes.

      I do not think that adding the sentence, “the publisher reserves the right to edit the manuscript” can be construed to mean that they have the right to make unauthorized changes. That is not editing. Editing, by industry standard, is a process that involves the participation and consent of the author. Perhaps this publisher should revise their future contracts to instead state: “Publisher has the right to unilaterally make changes to the manuscript, regardless of author input.”

      1. admin says:

        Yeah, I’m not a lawyer. I don’t KNOW the contract wouldn’t hold up in court. I DO KNOW that, legal or not, it was a dick move and the authors should get their rights back.

        I have a very sparse writing style, for the most part–no one’s every accused me of being long-winded, that’s for sure. I also have a couple of heavy-handed beta readers, and I love them and the work they do on my stories. I don’t care much for extra baggage. Adding stuff–whole paragraphs–to an author’s story isn’t editing.

    2. Sam H.R. says:

      This post gives great insight into your motivations, ethics, and morality, Lee.
      Who cares if it’s legal or not? Technically, it’s not illegal to hit the goose and the line of goslings following her as they cross the highway. Does that automatically make it right? Hell no!

      “Right” and “legal” are not the same thing. They should be. Their overlap should be damn near perfect. But it’s not. The most ridiculous lawsuits can win. Businesses can screw over their employees. And editors can send authors contracts that throw in unethical things like “I can rewrite your story if I want”.

  3. admin says:

    Didn’t say it was illegal. Their contract might even hold up in a court case–I don’t know, I haven’t seen a copy. I said it was bullshit. I said it wasn’t the way a real publisher does business. That’s something completely different. As a community of authors and readers, we should absolutely make each other aware of shoddy business practices, legal or not.

    Any contract includes verbage about the editor editing the work. You WANT to be edited, unless you’re a narcissist or an idiot, or both. This woman’s introduction to the world as an author includes a rape scene that she didn’t write, and you’re defending the one guy out of every hundred or so that figures “editing” means “adding paragraphs?”

  4. Lee Allen says:

    Nope. I wasn’t defending anyone. But you’ve said “rape scene” so much I had to do a little research. Actually, she says there’s a line that “hints of rape.” Both are shady moves to add to anyone’s story, but it’s a horror story with rape overtones anyway. But you didn’t get that far researching, did you? And certainly you shouting “He added an entire rape scene to a story about bunnies!” sounds so much better than “he made existing rape overtones more explicit,” doesn’t it? The miracle of your posting is it makes people unsympathetic because of your emotional exaggerations. She would do way better without you as her champion. You should sit this one out.

    1. Mandy DeGeit says:

      My story never had ANY rape tones at all in it. He actually changed my character to a boy. I’m not looking for anyone to champion me, just letting people know that this can be done and to be careful. Have a nice day.

    2. Vincent says:

      Lee Allen: It sounds like you’re defending this shoddy publisher. Why?

  5. S.C. Hayden says:

    The above comments reflect everything that is wrong with this country.
    Someone warns people that there may be a screwing a brewing and someone else is quick as lightening to point out that it isn’t, technically, illegal.
    Hey, if it isn’t illegal, it must be totally cool.
    Most people don’t read “editor reserves the right to make edits” as “editor may write a rape scene and stick it in your story without telling you.”
    Are you a publisher? If so, tell me which one so I can avoid it like the fucking plague.

    1. S.C. Hayden says:

      To be fair, whether or not a “rape” scene was added is irrelevant. If even a sliver of the allegations are true, this is total bullshit.

      “The anthology was released under the name of a different publisher, Undead Press, and my story was no longer my story. It had been butchered. I sat in my livingroom with one of the 6 copies I had purchased, flipping through the pages, eager to see my words in print… only they weren’t my words. It wasn’t even my TITLE. Parts of my story had been cut out, names and details had been changed, things I was never made aware of and had never agreed to . . .”

      “They turned a non-gendered character into a boy, they named the best friend, they created a memory for the main character about animal abuse. They added a suggestion of rape at the end . . .”

      None of that is typically what is meant when an editor says, “editor reserves the right to make edits.”

      These are not typical business practices in the small press world.
      Writers beware!

  6. Tim Lieder says:

    Met him at Anthocon. He’s a strange one – http://marlowe1.livejournal.com/1979914.html

  7. Adam Sprovieri says:

    Lee Allen,

    Imagine you were cast in a porno and you were going to get to bang the girl of your dreams, recorded for all the world to see. Now imagine that the girl of your dreams was edited out, and a large convict was edited in, raping you in the ass until you bled for all the world to see. How would you feel? Probably like you got fucked in the ass by a sandpaper cock.

    Have a nice life you taint.

  8. GNBraun says:

    Lee Allen – are you the editor in question under a false name? Industry standard for contracts is that authors will be consulted regarding any structural change. Editors don’t ‘add scenes’ and not tell the author. Editors make grammatical and punctuation changes. Yes, it might be legal under the contract this publisher sends out, but it’s immoral to do so and still publish this work under the author’s name without letting them know and say yes or no to the changes.

    Geoff Brown – AHWA president

    1. Bobbie Benton Hull says:

      Editors edit grammar, punctuation, and spelling. They may also rewrite a sentence or paragraph to make them flow better, but NEVER to change content. Anything more than that is a “rewrite” by the author. It’s as simple as that.

  9. admin says:

    Luckily, she has much better champions than I. Neil Gaiman, for example.

    “The publisher is an amateur and an idiot, & can barely write. I hope her experiences help warn young writers away from him.”

    You’re right. Mandy didn’t say anything about a rape SCENE. Luckily, that inaccuracy exists solely in the comment thread, and I drafted the actual blog post before working twelve hours and being up for sixteen. Feel free to tackle the IMPORTANT parts of the argument. If that’s your best defense of Tony G., you should just keep your fingers on his ballsack and off the keyboard.

  10. Cass says:

    Speaking as both an editor and a writer, I’ll just go with my first reaction. “What the fuck?! Assholes!”

    And as for you Lee Allen… Grow up. Small press publishing simply does not and should not work like that.

    I do make changes to authors work occasionally, but never never NEVER anything that would change the tenor (or any real detail) of the overall story. The author always gets copy of said changes before being handed to the publisher.

    Oh yeah, most importantly…I ask permission first!

    Adding content is just within an editors/publishers scope of rights or responsibility. And defending these guys makes you look unprofessional and just a bit stupid, with a hearty side of crazy, Mr Allen.

    1. Cass says:

      hmm. That should have been:

      Adding content is just NOT within an editors/publishers scope of rights or responsibility. And defending these guys makes you look unprofessional and just a bit stupid, with a hearty side of crazy, Mr Allen.

      I hate it when my fingers can’t keep up with my brain!

  11. Phil Bledsoe says:

    I love this article, and love the comment discussion thread.
    Lee Allen does sound like an Internet “sock puppet” for the publisher. I apologize to Lee (although reluctantly) if this is not the case, but if you don’t like the comparison then don’t behave as though you have this publisher’s personal interests so close to your heart. Reminds me of the phenomenon of all the “people” who came forward online to defend comic book rip-off artist Rob Granito. For those you you unfamiliar, go Google his name; he had suspiciously similar ethics.

  12. Lee Allen seems to be trying to make the argument that she signed away all rights to be treated by professional standards. I have never, ever had an editor not send me galleys. This was true when I was selling stories for $15 plus a contributor copy and it’s been true since I’ve been selling stories to markets that pay my rent. From small press to the big boys, NOBODY rewrites a story and considers it editing. I’ve had publishers love a story but hate the ending. You know what they do? Offer a suggestion and ask me to rewrite it. I either agree or disagree with their suggestion and rewrite the ending – but I rewrite it. Not someone who barely has a grasp of the English language. Me.

    These professional guidelines are what give the industry integrity. Undead Press, unfortunately, is the latest in a long list of small press horror names that make writers shake their head and wonder if it’s even worth it. This career path may be the most difficult out there and is frought with enough obstacles to make most aspiring writers throw in the towell already. The industry doesn’t need these assorted ass clowns crushing people’s spirits for, what, three hundred bucks? The book Undead Press published can’t have earned much. I’ve never heard of them until this entire fiasco made the internet angry.

  13. I’ve got two words for you regarding what an editor can and can’t do to a story: Gordon Lish. He was the editor for a certain short story writer who you may have heard of – Raymond Carver.

    Carver’s pared down style was due in no small part to Lish’s fairly savage edits to many of Carver’s original stories. He also changed the ending of at least one story and I think made changes to a couple of titles. Carver wasn’t too pleased about this as you’ll see from the link below.

    http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/12/24/071224fa_fact

    I’m not saying what they’ve done is right, because it most definitely isn’t. What I’m saying is that there is a precedent here; done in the name of an established publisher.

  14. Jerry S. Loomis says:

    I disagree with the assertion that the editors for the bigger companies don’t do this. In fact I would assume that it’s more likely for this to happen with a corporate owned property. Jim Shooter for example altered such famous works as the ending of the Dark Phoenix Saga, and gutted Tony Isabella’s run on Ghost Rider by rewriting the end of a story arc that featured Jesus Christ as a supporting character. I dare say things are a bit better now (J Michael Straczynski might disagree) but editors have a history of ham handed interference on creative works.

    1. admin says:

      Work for hire is totally different, Jerry. If I’m writing the X-Men, Marvel can make whatever changes they want. Marvel owns the X-Men. This is someone’s short story that they own the rights to and are effectively licensing the editor of an anthology to publish.

      1. David Mack says:

        As an author who has written more than 30 work-for-hire novels, novellas, short stories, and comic books over the last decade, I can honestly say no editor or publisher of a media tie-in property has ever treated me the way Giangregorio treated these authors.

        The editors and publishers I’ve worked with have behaved with consummate professionalism, and treated me with respect, even when I worked on intellectual property I didn’t own. There is simply no excuse for Undead Press’s behavior in this matter.

    2. Pufnstuff says:

      Your analogy of Jim Shooter/Dark Phoenix is bogus, in any road. Shooter did not change the story, he told Claremont & Byrne that the ending was unacceptable, the Phoenix had to pay the penalty of her actions. Then Claremont & Byrne rewrote/redrew the last several pages. Claremont and Byrne both said so in various interviews, and both agreed the ending was the better for it.

  15. Alex Hollins says:

    As an editor who’s worked with several different authors, that is just disgusting. That should never have happened, and an unilateral right to make edits without approval of the author should never be in a contract. In fact, I’m pretty sure if you’re guild it’s one of those things that AREN’T allowed in contracts, but I could be wrong there.

    martin,

    Carver seemed only to encourage and accept Lish’s ministrations—at least, until the summer of 1980.

    He was TOLD about and ACCEPTED the cuts, and then changed his mind. thats different.

    1. Hi Alex,

      Yes, Carver was told about them, but he also had little or no say (at least not if he wanted the collection to be published – meaning they had him over a barrel, so to speak). He changed his mind later, after they were published, when they were already out there in the public domain. There’s another article elsewhere that goes into the story in much more detail, though – damnit – I can’t find the thing!

      Again, I’ll reiterate, I don’t think what’s been done by Undead Press (or by Lish for that matter) is right. It isn’t. By all means make suggestions to the author in exchange for publication. However, if the author isn’t prepared to accept those changes then either reject the work or accept as is, but don’t publish something they haven’t had final say on. Unethical is a word that barely describes their actions adequately.

  16. Matt Nord says:

    I’ve never received a galley copy (an actual hard copy) for any anthology I’ve been in, but most of the time I receive at least a pdf of the interior for review. I’d think that would be pretty standard. I make it a point to get out a pdf to all the authors in an anthology I’m editing and get the go ahead before putting it out.

  17. Lee Allen says:

    Martin Stanley found the Raymond Carver example before I could come back to this thread, but yes, that’s been written on extensively. I find a lot of pleasure in the fanboy responses describing rape scenes, tell me to suck everyone’s dick, all followed by exactly the precedent you were demanding. I fully expect the children in this thread to return to the emotional aspect of their argument, imagining balls and cocks galore. Wow, you guys sure know how to win a debate :) It should be noted thought that Adam Sprovieri’s rape scene up there is worse than the one added to this anthology. Which explains why a quick Google search of Mr. Sprovieri returns a sad lack of publications and pictures he took of himself and his “cool” car. Live the dream, sir.

  18. Lee Allen says:

    And Mr. Loomis is correct. It is much more common the higher up you go. And I never said this was a good thing. That got lost somewhere with all the shit and balls being flung everywhere. Judging by the speed that this thread derailed into attacks, I wonder why anyone would bother having a conversation with such high-strung amateurs? But then I don’t wonder very long. Please don’t disappoint me with your responses.

  19. Cass says:

    dear god this Lee Allen guy is hilarious.

  20. S.C. Hayden says:

    The Raymond Carver example dose not fit at all. Carver knew about and agreed to the changes. According to the referenced blogs, the first time these authors saw the changes was when they saw their stories in print.
    Rape scenes aside, cocks aside, balls aside, and with a Mr. Spock like lack of emotion, what, Lee Allen, is your point?
    Is it that writers should read contracts more carefully before they sign them?
    If so, agreed.
    I’ll take it a step further.
    Writers should not sign contracts with Undead Press.

  21. Michael Rowe says:

    What S.C. Hayden said.

    The only “high strung amateur” response here is the one that attempts to justify entirely unethical and unprofessional behaviour on Undead Press’s part, or proposes to blame the author for anything except undue trust. No professional writer with any decent track record would find any justification for what happened.

  22. Lee Allen says:

    Exactly. Read the contract.
    Also, you don’t seem to have the facts in the Carver case. Raymond Carver’s wife tells a different story and has been for years. In fact, this story in the New Yorker doesn’t seem to resemble the version on this thread, or the one you’re perpetrating, in any way:

    http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/12/24/071224fa_fact

    Bringing up the Carver case was simply to answer the demands of the poster, who sputtered something about “examples of legitimate, established publishers adding paragraphs, rape scenes, etc. to an author’s work without their consent.” Show me! he cried. And it’s been shown, over and over, off topic as it was.

    This was all very easily researched. As are publishers.

  23. S.C. Hayden says:

    How on earth is the OP’s demand or any of the Raymond Carver responses “off topic?”
    Do you understand what on and off topic means?
    We are talking about editors adding things to stories without author consent.
    That IS the topic.

    1. S.C. Hayden says:

      On second thought, don’t answer.
      You are either affiliated with Undead Press or an internet troll.
      Either way, I’m done with this.
      Fell free to get the last word.

  24. Michael Rowe says:

    I must re-read Carver to find the examples of where the editors of his work have added backstories, character motivations, and rape scenes in his fiction without his consent. For reasons obviously inexplicable to any moderately-serious professional writer, some people seem to have a hard time distinguishing between heavy editing (which is often par for the course, and which involves trimming, not adding, and is subject to the author’s approval) and the egregiousness of what Undead Press has been cited for above.

  25. Lee Allen says:

    Wow. Listen to me for a second. You’re probably not going to find rape scenes inserted into Raymond Carver’s fiction unless the story had a rape subplot to begin with, which is exactly what the story in question had. Also, if you look closer you’ll see that it was not a rape “scene” that was inserted at all. Everyone has so much fun saying “rape” over and over here, even though it’s the equivalent to saying “chewing” when referring to a story about bubblegum. I thought this was a horror site. You people are tiresome. Get on the same page for this debate with the facts and drop the exaggerations and let me know when this happens. There was originally a lot we could have talked about. See you in a year.

    1. Ray Ford says:

      where you asleep at the keyboard when the writer herself replied directly to you in this discussion that her story did NOT contain any rape over/under tones period? You are so caught up with arguing with everyone that you have strayed from the facts yourself.

  26. Michael Rowe says:

    Lee, if you’d been able to read carefully without whatever your agenda is, you might have learned something and perhaps become a little less ignorant by the close of business today, but none of us are being paid to educate you here.

    It’s rather obvious that you’re not a professional writer, and you’re certainly not a reputable editor, which rather leaves us with the only conclusion available when considering someone who screams “listen to me!” In short, you have nothing to add to the discussion of any merit. No one is “debating” you, because this isn’t a debatable issue. There aren’t two sides to this story, period.

    Frankly, I think everyone has tried to be as patient and polite as possible with you with regard to your comments, but as S.C. just said, feel free to get the last word.

  27. Lee Allen says:

    I see you refuse to acknowledge the logical fallacy that inserting a rape scene into just any old story is the same thing as inserting a line that refers to a rape in a story that is already about this subject. Both of which I abhor. Also, my agenda is pointing out how people can miraculously lose support for good causes with exaggerations and a willful ignorance of facts. You’ve showed that just now by ignoring everything I’ve exposed in your argument. And who was screaming?

    Yes, you’re right. There aren’t two sides to this story. There are now ten sides due to exactly the kind of confusion and hyperbole that’s found here.

  28. Resa Haile says:

    Lee Allen:

    But Lee, perhaps you missed Mandy’s comment on here, in which she states that there were no rape tones (and thus, one would think, no rape) in her story. I am puzzled by why you keep stating something contrary to what the author has stated. Possibly you read the story as published? But that doesn’t allow you to see what her story was–which is actually why she is upset.

  29. Editor says:

    Lee Allen is absolutely NOT Anthony Giangregorio. As whack as his (her?) opinion is, he/she expresses himself/herself well on paper and has a good command of the language. Have you ever seen an email from Giangregorio? He’s practically illiterate.

    1. admin says:

      I was thinking the same thing, myself.

  30. adam says:

    Giangregorio also operates Living Dead Press and Open Casket Press.

  31. [...] « Undead Press: They’ll Add Shit to Your Story. [...]

  32. [...] The day after these posts went live LitReactor responded with Publisher of Anthology Screws Over Writer: A Cautionary Tale, authors, Jon F Merz  and Lincoln Crisler chime in with A Writer’s Best Defense (Merz) and Undead Press: They’ll Add Shit to Your Story (Crisler) [...]

  33. [...] covered the douchebaggery of Tony Giangregorio and Undead Press here and here if you need to get caught up. Those of you already in the know might be interested in [...]

  34. [...] immediately on the defensive. An interview with DeGeit. An interview with the editor in question. Lincoln Crisler on why this shouldn’t have happened. Brent Abell on the contract she received. Karen Woodward on editing [...]