We’ll always have Paris

 

Awesome-Ice-Cream-25p813a

Normally we delete spam, but when a NY Escort Service sends you spam  well . . . .

 

I think that everything posted made a ton of sense. But, what about this? what if you typed a catchier post title? I am not suggesting your content isn’t solid, but what if you added something that makes people desire more?

I mean “And The New York Times fires back with a Greatest Non-Fic List of its own, which is quite revealing | Far & Beyond: A Saga of Publishing” is kinda vanilla.

You might peek at Yahoo’s front page and see how they create post headlines to grab people to click. You might add a related video or a related pic or two to grab readers excited about what you’ve written. In my opinion, it might make your posts a little livelier.

 

 

Truthfully, we have rarely encountered such cultured (even literate) spam. But we’ll have to leave it to the ladies of Westchester (we’ve seen the website) to  “grab” and “excite” people.

 

Making lives “livelier”  and less “vanilla”  through spam and personal services is probably far more financially rewarding than publishing. However, to us, there’s nothing more fascinating, desirable, or alluring than the rich dark print of a word laid bare upon a soft sheet of creamy paper.

 

Paris-Typeface-Reg-big(5)

Now admit it, aren’t you imagining yourself on a late summer afternoon, arm in arm with your love, having a cooling vanilla cone, as you stroll down the boulevard toward the glinting Eiffel Tower?

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements
Published in: on August 5, 2013 at 6:19 PM  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , ,

Zero Hour @ Amazon + Truthiness @ Randstad = Angry Workers

zero-hour

For those of you that didn’t read the Daily Mail’s article on Amazon warehouse “employees,” you really missed a treat.

We won’t spoil it for you, but here’s a teaser: Employee bathroom breaks are timed. And of course Amazon knows an employee is in the bathroom because all employees are geo-tagged!

And if that’s not enough to convince you to read the story . . .

Amazon bosses tried to save money by instructing the Randstad agency (who provided the workers) to deceive their staff by not offering them holiday pay.

Andrew Kingsley, a former Randstad representative, said  “The [Randstad] agency reps were instructed not to tell them” [the Randstad people working as Amazon employees) that they were entitled to holiday pay.

And Randstad was ok with that. Really, just lovely.

America’s not only exporting  its 19th century business mentalities, it’s exporting the concept of Truthiness too.

59th Annual Emmy Awards - Arrivals

So, what will happen in US cities as Amazon brings “employment” to various sites — including 5000 jobs across the country in warehouses with at least 100+ of those at Amazon’s San Bernardino, California warehouse? Anyone’s guess.

But for a preview of all the possibilities, including zero hour contract workers and much, much more, read up! If you prefer your news in a more contemporary format, the BBC’s Channel 4 video report tells all — and includes interviews with some of the workers.

Enjoy!

(And yes, we do love the reporter’s mutton sleeve jacket — an homage to the 100th anniversary of the UK Sufferagette movement!)

Cuckoo Redux

Worst Kept Secret Ever!

Worst Kept Secret Ever!


Hard to believe, but the JK Rowling aka Robert Galbraith story has finally come to a conclusion, sort of.

One Weds, JK Rowling took her law firm, Russells, to court and won a judgement against them. Russells has agreed to make a large donation to The Soldiers’ Charity, at Rowling’s request, and has apologised publicly for the indiscretion.

Nowhere does it mention JK Rowling leaving Russells or the offending lawyer Christoper Gossage, being disbarred or even censured. However, the lawyer appearing for JK Rowling — Jenny Afia, is from Schillings law firm. So that does seem to indicate a shift in business.

Rowling, who was not in court for the hearing, said in a statement: “This donation is being made to The Soldiers’ Charity partly as a thank you to the army people who helped me with research, but also because writing a hero who is a veteran has given me even greater appreciation and understanding of exactly how much this charity does for ex-servicemen and their families, and how much that support is needed.

“I always intended to give The Soldiers’ Charity a donation out of Robert’s royalties, but I had not anticipated him making the bestseller list a mere three months after publication (indeed, I had not counted on him ever being there!).”

Of course, within that statement is the implication she spoke with “army people” as part of her research for the book. This rather implies that she went to Army soldiers and officers and said “Hey I’m doing research and would you mind . . . .” That statement implies at least a few Army personnel knew she doing research for a new book and any one of them could have mentioned it.

Too, it flies in the face of previous statements that Rowling made saying only told a “handful” of her most trusted advisers knew that she wrote a crime novel. Yes, maybe only a handful knew she was Robert Galbraith. But if she was talking to Army personnel doing research, people beyond the “handful” had to know she was writing a new book which featured some sort of Army connection.

Rowling’s lawyer told the court that Rowling was “angry and distressed that her confidences had been betrayed and this was very much aggravated by repeated speculation that the leak had, in fact, been a carefully coordinated publicity stunt by her, her agent and her publishers, designed to increase sales.”

Aggravating maybe, but completely understandable. Especially when one takes into consideration the fact that other publishing houses had rejected the novel as “good, but not good enough to a launch new author” and she ended up back at her old publisher instead of taking the book apart and trying to make it worthy of new author publication before submitting it again.

Solicitors for Gossage and Callegari said they had offered their sincere apologies to Rowling and legally undertaken “not to make any further public statements about this incident or the claimant.” Putting a lid on the matter once and for all.

Rowling will donate the equivalent of three years’ worth of royalties from The Cuckoo’s Calling to The Soldiers’ Charity. “It’s a not insignificant amount. We’re over the moon,” said a spokesman for the charity. So, all’s well that ends well. And hopefully, Rowling has learned to avoid pen names from now on. But don’t count on it!

Published in: on August 1, 2013 at 10:26 AM  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , , ,

Wigging out as the alibis abound

judges-wig-white-143-620x400

It’s always nice when a plot thickens and with Cuckoo’s Calling there seems no end. The latest report on how JK Rowling was outted boils down to this:

Paul Calegari is senior partner at K&L Gates. This team attracts the respect of the business community for its advice on a range of matters including boardroom disputes and strategic issues. Paul counts AOL and The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation among his clients.

Paul has a wife Judith Callegari. Judith is friends with Mrs Gossage. Mrs Gossage is married to Mr Chris Gossage.

Chris Gossage is a lawyer at Russells Solicitors, the firm that represents JK Rowling. Russells stands out for its extremely strong music practice and garners high praise for its skill in negotiating lucrative deals. Chris has built a profile in the market as a “a good executor” on the transactional side.

Chris told his wife’s best friend, Judith, in a “private conversation” that JK Rowling was the author because Judith was someone he “trusted implicitly.”

What’s great about this story is how waffly it its. Chris is telling Judith, not his wife. Chris’s wife didn’t know. She didn’t happen to tell her BFF, who then spilt the beans. So Chris and Judith are . . . close?

Then there’s Russells statement:

We, Russells Solicitors, apologise unreservedly for the disclosure caused by one of our partners, Chris Gossage, in revealing to his wife’s best friend, Judith Callegari, during a private conversation that the true identity of Robert Galbraith was in fact JK Rowling. Whilst accepting his own culpability, the disclosure was made in confidence to someone he trusted implicitly.

While Russells apologizes “unreservedly,” they then go on to make the excuse that Chris violated attorney-client privilege because he trusted Judith implicitly. That doesn’t make it less a breach of ethics. In fact, it just makes it worse. Too, all this waffle makes it sound like they’re just trying to avoid saying Chris was having an affair with Judith.

What we don’t hear is that Chris Gossage is being struck off the rolls (that’s English for disbarred). In fact, we don’t even hear the word “fired.”  Interesting.

JK Rowling has said

To say that I am disappointed is an understatement. I had assumed that I could expect total confidentiality from Russells, a reputable professional firm, and I feel very angry that my trust turned out to be misplaced.

But she has not indicated she’ll be removing her business from Russells or suing them for damages. Interesting. (Although, good luck proving she was “damaged” by this revelation.)

Judith Callegari has pulled down her Facebook page. Probably wise, though it’s hard to imagine anyone would want to attack her for outting JK Rowling. She apparently didn’t do it for money. But in a way, that make this just her outting Rowling that much more interesting.

As a lawyer’s wife, and “friend” of a lawyer, she must have known what she was doing was unethical. She must have known it would hurt her family, her friend, her . . . whatever Chris is to her, not to mention all the law firms involved. And yet when she tweeted this news, it was @JudeCallegari. In other words, she made it very easy to be “discovered” by the legal teams (particularly Chris) which she knew would be hunting for the “leak.”

Is Judith an attention seeker? A JK Rowling fan? Was she trying to hurt or ruin Chris? Trying to end her marriage (and possibly Chris’s)? Or maybe she was just doing as she was asked?

It’s difficult to believe it’s all “as stated.” Yes, people can do stupid things. But not  typically when the people are senior partners (or their wives) at law firms with a lot to lose. And not typically when it involves the best entertainment firm in the UK representing the highest grossing author of all time. So, did Russells arrange this leak? Lawyers really don’t mind getting their hand dirty for a good client. If the leak is tracked back to JK Rowling’s own law firm, that’s far better than a track back to the author, her agent, or her publisher.

Russells goes out of it’s way to state it was all accidental on their part.

On becoming aware of the circumstances, we immediately notified JK Rowling’s agent. We can confirm that this leak was not part of any marketing plan and that neither JK Rowling, her agent nor publishers were in any way involved.

It sounds like a love triangle gone terribly wrong that inadvertently exposed JK Rowling. But who can really say. The public is left with a mystery — even as the sales figures for Russells’ client’s book continue to climb. Readers will still have to decide for themselves whodunit, why, and whether The Cuckoo is worth the calling.

Published in: on July 19, 2013 at 11:33 AM  Comments (1)  
Tags: , , , , , ,

Not your typical summer read

CatDaddy_FINAL-smaller

For those of you that didn’t read it in hardback when it came out last year, Cat Daddy by Jackson Galaxy (of Animal Planet’s My Cat From Hell fame) is now available in paperback (as well as audiobook & ebook).

The subtitle: What the world’s most incorrigible cat taught me about life, love and coming clean, barely begins to scratch the surface.

This is an unflinching and honest look at a human life, ruined by addictions and redeemed by the love of a cat, that not for the faint of heart.

But for those with the courage to take it up, you will be rewarded. While there are tips about cat care scattered throughout, this is more in the vein of an full-throttle autobiography (both Jackson’s and his cat Benny’s).

Rarely have we come across an author so willing to rip away the mask and yet so able to eloquently tell his truth (about shelters, addiction, loss, change, growth and so much more) in a can’t-put-it down fashion.

Definitely 5 stars. Definitely someone we hope will be publishing future works, of fiction, nonfiction or even verse!

Real-Men_0

What are you doing here?

office-in-peeps_l

 

It was a tight race, but Gina got the dyed egg in a spoon across the office and back ahead of Oswaldo.

JS wasn’t actually third. He was on that box because he saw a spider in his cubicle and wouldn’t get down till one of the ladies dispatched it. He grabbed the medal for spider-protective purposes only.

Now, down from those boxes, peeps, and head on home!

Off you go, too, readers!

Enjoy your Passover or Easter!

Published in: on March 25, 2013 at 12:24 PM  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , ,

A Tale of Three Titles

Because smart people would prefer to starve and have an overpriced degree?

Over the weekend, the NY Times ran an article by David Leonhardt. It was in the upper right corner of its webpage, so no one could miss it.

The title? Scholarly Poor Often Overlook Better Colleges

In the text blurb below it said:

Most low-income students who have top test scores and grades do not even apply to the nation’s best colleges, which contributes to widening economic inequality, economists say.

The title rather implies the higher achieving academic students, from the lower economic brackets, logically assume they can’t afford a college, so they don’t bother to apply. The blame implied falls squarely on the students who are made out to be too stupid to realize they might get scholarships if they apply.

By the time this link was emailed to another FABulist, the title had changed to

Better Colleges Failing to Lure Talented Poor, Study Shows

Now the blame falls squarely on the Better Colleges. They aren’t doing enough to “lure” students, which sounds a bit creepy. Or as if students were again rather stupid, like fish, and need to be lured. Note too, the “Scholarly” poor became merely talented — and this according to a study (so, no bias there).

And as if this wasn’t enough . . . . yes, the title was changed a third time a few minutes later  to

Better Colleges Failing to Lure Poorer Strivers

Now the blame is back on the students, specifically those who don’t strive well. Because everyone knows, if a person is a good striver, they’ll to get into a better college.

Poorer strivers? Really?

After you just said they “have top test scores and grades”? They seem to strive well enough.

Of course, the most amusing part of this constant updating is the link itself, which was never updated and continues to read http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/education/scholarly-poor-often-overlook-better-colleges.html.

Speaking of overlooked . . . . .

Published in: on March 18, 2013 at 3:52 AM  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , ,