A new book controversy

[cjpilotboy]

Well as the title states iv got a odd story to share. My pastor (not relating it to my religion making a religious discussion at all) wrote a book over the past few years and it just released 2 weeks ago. The sales were up in the New York Times Best Selling margins but it got turned down (for a reason unknown to me and potentially not the point of this). The publisher predicted, have seen the massive sales of the book on the first week, guessed that it would be around the 3rd place for nonfiction for the next publication of the Times. The publisher also said it would take 1st for the leadership category as well. Now after all of that excitement (being that non of the money is going to the author and all of the authors cut is being donated) he was amazed on how well his book was doing. What i am wondering is why, regardless of the numbers, the NYT decided to not put his book on the list. I am more curious (the real reason for this post) on how often this happens. We see the NYT as a standard of the USA and a goal. How often dose that list get changed because of a executive power play (Kroni-Capitalism) happened? What are the numbers or is it even common to why it happened or how it happens?

[AElf]

It would help if we knew the title & author . . . kind of difficult to work in the dark.

[INnudeguy]

If it was a children's book then I've heard that the NYT does not include those in the listings. but I'm not entirely positive about that.

[cjpilotboy]

The title is Home Run Life and the author (one of the co authors) is Kevin Queen, the other author is John C. Maxwell
Maxwell has been on the best sellers list before and he has many many books, so i doubt the connections are not the issue.

[AElf]

Okay, the title is Home Run: Learn God's Game Plan for Life and Leadership . . . but c'mon, "God's plan?"  Give me a break.  Unless they've got some proof of divine editorial assistance they should have titled the book Home Run: Learn Myers & Maxwell's Game Plan for Bilking the Credulous with Homespun Theology & Baseball Metaphors at seventeen bucks per copy.  That is why it isn't on the NYTimes list.

[mikeisnude]

Okay, the title is Home Run: Learn God's Game Plan for Life and Leadership . . . but c'mon, "God's plan?"  Give me a break.  Unless they've got some proof of divine editorial assistance they should have titled the book Home Run: Learn Myers & Maxwell's Game Plan for Bilking the Credulous with Homespun Theology & Baseball Metaphors at seventeen bucks per copy.  That is why it isn't on the NYTimes list.

I could NOT disagree more      Your bias against religion is showing and I think you should "check it"  The original question and post made it clear that it was not a question about religion only that he wanted to know why it would not on the NYT list.  You have let your bias deter you from offering a non biased reason for why the book is not listed.  I am normally a HUGE fan of your posts but here I have to point out and obvious bias and offer a reminder that we are not supposed to comment on religion.   

[AElf]

Okay, the title is Home Run: Learn God's Game Plan for Life and Leadership . . . but c'mon, "God's plan?"  Give me a break.  Unless they've got some proof of divine editorial assistance they should have titled the book Home Run: Learn Myers & Maxwell's Game Plan for Bilking the Credulous with Homespun Theology & Baseball Metaphors at seventeen bucks per copy.  That is why it isn't on the NYTimes list.

I could NOT disagree more      Your bias against religion is showing and I think you should "check it"  The original question and post made it clear that it was not a question about religion only that he wanted to know why it would not on the NYT list.  You have let your bias deter you from offering a non biased reason for why the book is not listed.  I am normally a HUGE fan of your posts but here I have to point out and obvious bias and offer a reminder that we are not supposed to comment on religion.   

Check your PMs!

[cjpilotboy]

Seriously, the first thing i said was that religion was not open for discussion and not the topic of this. And if so how would you explain the #3 in paperback nonfiction for 2013? There is no logic in the statement made by AElf and this is not for discussion in this topic.

On a more direct note, dose anyone know of or heard of a similar story or a book in witch this has happened?

[INnudeguy]

Okay, the title is Home Run: Learn God's Game Plan for Life and Leadership . . . but c'mon, "God's plan?"  Give me a break.  Unless they've got some proof of divine editorial assistance they should have titled the book Home Run: Learn Myers & Maxwell's Game Plan for Bilking the Credulous with Homespun Theology & Baseball Metaphors at seventeen bucks per copy.  That is why it isn't on the NYTimes list.

I could NOT disagree more      Your bias against religion is showing and I think you should "check it"  The original question and post made it clear that it was not a question about religion only that he wanted to know why it would not on the NYT list.  You have let your bias deter you from offering a non biased reason for why the book is not listed.  I am normally a HUGE fan of your posts but here I have to point out and obvious bias and offer a reminder that we are not supposed to comment on religion.   

   but in this case     with mike

[INnudeguy]

Seriously, the first thing i said was that religion was not open for discussion and not the topic of this. And if so how would you explain the #3 in paperback nonfiction for 2013? There is no logic in the statement made by AElf and this is not for discussion in this topic.

On a more direct note, dose anyone know of or heard of a similar story or a book in witch this has happened?

   with what cj is saying here as well.

[NudieDaniel]

Seriously, the first thing i said was that religion was not open for discussion and not the topic of this. And if so how would you explain the #3 in paperback nonfiction for 2013? There is no logic in the statement made by AElf and this is not for discussion in this topic.

On a more direct note, does anyone know of or heard of a similar story or a book in which this has happened?

Well the NYT is privately owned company it can what hell it likes really. Personally, I don't have any NYT best sellers on my bookshelf and only ever read a few that have properly because most stuff on the NYT best sellers list is populist rubbish I never read anyway.

[Fitz1980]

Cjpioltboy hasn't provided any citation that the book sold enough copies to qualify for the NYT bestsellers list. Perhaps the pastor is exaggerating his sales to feed into the persecution complex so many religious folks have.

[cjpilotboy]

Cjpioltboy hasn't provided any citation that the book sold enough copies to qualify for the NYT bestsellers list. Perhaps the pastor is exaggerating his sales to feed into the persecution complex so many religious folks have.

The book is so new it dosnt have official documents on it (such as the NYT) But if a publisher and the offical seller of the book say it wasnt possible for it not to be on the list after the first week then i wouldn't doubt the pastor (of a big church, along with John Maxwell) would lie to everyone there it wouldn't be worth it at all. Non of the money is going to the pastor himself and he is donating it. There isnt a need to make up a number for that and honestly they didn't even think it would of sold as much as it did. I personally got a second copy at the store (Books For Less) and everyone in line had at least 2+ copes of the book in there hand.

Also the proof is online, 12Stone Church (the pastors church) recoreds everything and the book's website and also the facebook page for the book. Also (yet even more proof) Is the sales on amazon.com under the product details: http://www.amazon.com/Home-Run-Learn-Gods-Leadership/dp/1455577227/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1392785044&sr=1-1&keywords=home+run+learn+god%27s+game+plan+for+life+and+leadership

[AElf]

Okay, the title is Home Run: Learn God's Game Plan for Life and Leadership . . . but c'mon, "God's plan?"  Give me a break.  Unless they've got some proof of divine editorial assistance they should have titled the book Home Run: Learn Myers & Maxwell's Game Plan for Bilking the Credulous with Homespun Theology & Baseball Metaphors at seventeen bucks per copy.  That is why it isn't on the NYTimes list.

I could NOT disagree more      Your bias against religion is showing and I think you should "check it"  The original question and post made it clear that it was not a question about religion only that he wanted to know why it would not on the NYT list.  You have let your bias deter you from offering a non biased reason for why the book is not listed.  I am normally a HUGE fan of your posts but here I have to point out and obvious bias and offer a reminder that we are not supposed to comment on religion.   

You drag out religion and take the trouble to add an unfounded and unjustified personal attack on me . . . nice.

But I’m not talking about religion, I’m talking about the book trade and the NY Times bestseller list.  Now I don’t know for a certainty everything that gets discussed in the process of deciding the ins & outs of the list but I do know that it isn’t all weak tea and literary merit.  There are lawyers involved and there are legal and financial considerations to be weighed.

Here is the basic fact – writers write for a reason and that reason is personal gain.  Whether that gain is defined in terms of money, power, fame or something else it is still personal gain.  Writing is not an altruistic endeavour.  Shakespeare and Austen didn’t write because of "their art," they wrote to put money in their pockets.  (Hermit poets like Emily Dickinson are notable exceptions to this rule – she wrote as therapy.)  It is safe to say that the overwhelming majority of writers write for gain.

When you are looking at a book that includes the words "God’s plan" for anything at all you know immediately that you are dealing with a person who purports to know the mind of God.  In other times and places that would be quite enough to have the writer burned at the stake, crucified or stoned to death . . . maybe all three but in a different order.  At the very best of times people who take this position are misguided; at the worst they are frauds.  At any position along the spectrum between and including those two points they are most certainly being blasphemous.  Myers & Maxwell’s book is to religion what Bernie Madoff was to investing, a con game played for profit, and their claim to know the mind of God is an insult to anyone who actually studies their religion rather than just parroting it.

Humankind cannot know the mind of God FULL STOP   Whether you are an Albigensian or a Zoroastrian or inhabit some other letter in the alphabet of religions you should know that religion is all about the relationship between God and humankind.  All else is smoke and mirrors and has been made up by humans, usually a bunch of old men.  Most of it is borrowed from older religions now decried as being pagan.  People have a perverse history of vilifying religions other than their own while simultaneously sanctifying doctrines and practices stolen from their defeated rivals.  What most religious zealots fail to recognize is that freedom of religion means “freedom of all religions.” 

Freedom of religion is much like freedom of speech.  Yes, you are free to believe and speak as you wish so long as you do it within the limits of the law and are willing to let others do the same.  That does not mean that your freedom obligates anyone else to listen to you, nor does it obligate them to provide you a soapbox upon which to stand.

The NY Times bestseller list is one such soapbox.  For the NYT to endorse M&M’s book they could be considered to be putting their imprimatur on the notion that the book is indeed what its title purports.  As noted above there are legal and financial considerations attached to any such endorsement, as well as the matter of reputation. That is very likely the reason the NYT has withheld giving such an endorsement to M&M.

Is that clear enough or shall I expect the Inquisition to arrive?  Tell them to bring their snow shovels, or maybe they can just burn a path to my door.

[cjpilotboy]

Okay, the title is Home Run: Learn God's Game Plan for Life and Leadership . . . but c'mon, "God's plan?"  Give me a break.  Unless they've got some proof of divine editorial assistance they should have titled the book Home Run: Learn Myers & Maxwell's Game Plan for Bilking the Credulous with Homespun Theology & Baseball Metaphors at seventeen bucks per copy.  That is why it isn't on the NYTimes list.

I could NOT disagree more      Your bias against religion is showing and I think you should "check it"  The original question and post made it clear that it was not a question about religion only that he wanted to know why it would not on the NYT list.  You have let your bias deter you from offering a non biased reason for why the book is not listed.  I am normally a HUGE fan of your posts but here I have to point out and obvious bias and offer a reminder that we are not supposed to comment on religion.   

You drag out religion and take the trouble to add an unfounded and unjustified personal attack on me . . . nice.

But I’m not talking about religion, I’m talking about the book trade and the NY Times bestseller list.  Now I don’t know for a certainty everything that gets discussed in the process of deciding the ins & outs of the list but I do know that it isn’t all weak tea and literary merit.  There are lawyers involved and there are legal and financial considerations to be weighed.

Here is the basic fact – writers write for a reason and that reason is personal gain.  Whether that gain is defined in terms of money, power, fame or something else it is still personal gain.  Writing is not an altruistic endeavour.  Shakespeare and Austen didn’t write because of "their art," they wrote to put money in their pockets.  (Hermit poets like Emily Dickinson are notable exceptions to this rule – she wrote as therapy.)  It is safe to say that the overwhelming majority of writers write for gain.

*removed becuase it is off topic and not the point of this*

The NY Times bestseller list is one such soapbox.  For the NYT to endorse M&M’s book they could be considered to be putting their imprimatur on the notion that the book is indeed what its title purports.  As noted above there are legal and financial considerations attached to any such endorsement, as well as the matter of reputation. That is very likely the reason the NYT has withheld giving such an endorsement to M&M.

Is that clear enough or shall I expect the Inquisition to arrive?  Tell them to bring their snow shovels, or maybe they can just burn a path to my door.

I see your point (the legal side of things). That is a odd thing and a difficult one at times to put on paper on the exact reason why it would not be included. But if you think this is all about personal gain then you are still incorrect. Iv said this before, Meyers isn't gaining anything from this, he just wants to get out his view of life to others to try and help them understand theirs and hopefully help them in the long run. Life isn't about getting the most for yourself (in my own philosophy of course) but it is about relationships with others and helping each other grow not only as people but a community. So personal gain is out the window. Also if you want to tag it to Maxwell then you really don't know him. He dost need this book to be published at all for fame and success were already entitled to his name before this book was even though of. It is not for personal gain, that is the last time im going to say it.

Now for the controversy of the NYT, if it is such a valued and upheld list of books why do we allow it to be a privatized list? Like you say they have endorsements for M&M and such others, why do we hold it so highly if it is all just kroni? Dose not a free list, outside of the world of bias exists? One in which true numbers are recorded and published truthfully? I guess reading it from a newspaper is just easyer than from a almanac. Why do we let the NYT define the book market if it is corrupt, that is the real question.