Milo Y., awful person, received a book deal from Simon & Shuster earlier this year. It was greeted with horror by most reasonable people and caused some authors to cut ties with S&S. S&S ultimately killed the contract, which resulted in a lawsuit.
There is a lot more to parse here, with links, but I’m not able.
(Maybe someone will kindly do that, as my mac took a crap & I’m posting on my phone, which is murder on my eyeballs & skills. I’ll be an old lady on an old Dell, commenting as a burner @ krabbypaddy’s dell hell)
The twitters blew up today when the editor’s annotations to the full manuscript were dug up by a reporter who accessed public NY State Supreme Court documents. If I’m reading this right, the annotated manuscript was entered in to evidence?
I felt weird and conflicted but couldn’t quite figure out why. At the time it was only white (mostly in writing/publishing) people in the discussion having a good laugh. There are many examples of this if you go look. Below is a late, threaded addition to this party:
Then, Roxane Gay nailed it; the editor was trying to salvage a contract with so much $$ at stake by, “making hatred palatable.”
She said in 3 words what I had struggled to find words for all day. I’ve learned so much here in this forum, which is why I knew I should not dismiss my weird feeling. But clearly, I still have so much to learn.
What do you think about this?
2 Notes: I hope the tweets thread right. Kinja is telling me I have to upload a thumbnail to publish, so here ya go....