Publisher's refusal to dedicate book {To Clarence Thomas} angers editor

THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | Joyce Howard Price

[wallcrawlr]

The editor of a scholarly book on the Declaration of Independence says he is angry that the publisher barred him from dedicating it to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

"Clarence Thomas has been the leading voice on the Declaration of Independence in the 21st century, just as Martin Luther King was in the 20th century. I found it shocking when CQ Press told me I couldn't dedicate my book to Clarence Thomas," said Scott Douglas Gerber, a law professor at Ohio Northern University in Ada, Ohio.

[1bigdictator]

Ping. Where's Jesse and loud-mouthed Sharpton now?

[dead]

But John A. Jenkins, general manager of CQ and senior vice president of Congressional Quarterly Inc., said the companies have an "inviolate policy" of "never ever permitting a book to be dedicated to a sitting member of government."

If that’s their policy, and they’ve never violated it, this is a non-story.

[07055]

Dozens of conservatives are now poring over books published by this outfit to find times when this policy was violated to benefit liberals....

[stylin_geek]

"We will permit forewords to be written by [sitting government officials] if the person is commending the volume that follows and the message meets our requirements for objectivity," Mr. Jenkins said.

This statement indicates to me that Mr. Gerber has a case. How can you have requirements for objectivity? A forward is either objective or subjective. To claim a forward has to meet "requirements" indicates there very well are some subjective standards.

[Peach]

Clarence Thomas: A fine man, who the liberal left continue to try and diminish. May he know he is well thought of by most and comforted to know that his expertise and brilliant mind are appreciated.

[Frohickey]

Mr. Jenkins said Mr. Gerber told CQ Press he planned to dedicate his book to his grandparents when he signed the contract in early 2001. Mr. Jenkins said not until more than a year later did CQ officials learn from a third party that Mr. Gerber wanted the book dedicated to Justice Thomas.

Justice Clarence Thomas could adopt Mr. Gerber. Then Mr. Gerber can dedicate it to his adopted father. :)

[Cicero]

It could be argued that public figures have written forwards in their roles as scholars or writers, but that a dedication is a different matter.

I don't think there's a case here unless it can be shown that CQ has allowed one of its other publications to be dedicated to an active politician or member of the government.

I suspect that if there were such a dedication, the complainant would already have found it and made it part of his argument.

[connectthedots]

This decision will probably help greatly increase sales. I'm going to make arrangements to buy a copy.

[dead]

He's stating that their is some flexibility in their acceptance of forwards written by political figures.

But, he claims that there are no exceptions to their policy on dedications.

If he's lying, they have a complaint. If he's not, they don't.

It shouldn't be too hard to determine whether or not he's lying.

[irishfest]

I agree. Where's the issue??

[stylin_geek]

Honestly, I had some doubts as to whether or not Mr. Gerber had a case until I saw that phrase. Yes, it should be easy to prove, but to use the term "subjective" in the same sentence as "requirements" is typical obfuscation by those who are hiding something. At first read, the sentence makes it appear they have a rigid standard, until you realize the standard has "requirements."

Of course, after 8 years of Bill, it makes one more than a little suspicious of any type of media outlet, and it becomes second nature to parse such sentences.

[stylin_geek]

Sorry, as confusion reigns over my reply...replace "subjective" with "standards."

Perhaps an afternoon nap is in order.

[cruiserman]

Whining about a dedication after accepting that they would publish his book is pretty stupid.

[stylin_geek]

and yet again, "subjective" with "requirements."

Going for a new record "how many times I can post correcting my own mistakes."

[constans]

Yes, it will probably increase sales, but given that the publisher had a pre-existing policy of not allowing dedications to sitting political figures, this would imply that the author purposely attempted to make the dedication to Clarence Thomas, in the hopes of generating buzz.

But, hey, who here is going to stand up for the poor, beleaguered publisher just trying to make a living in his world and running his publishing house "his own way," huh? I mean, isn't denying authors the ability to dedicate their books to whomever they want what owning your own publishing company is all about? :)

[connectthedots]

I would not disagree.

[beckett]

The publisher defended his position well. If that is the company's policy, and it can be shown to be the policy the company has followed for all publications, right and left, this is a non-story.

[mhking]

Black conservative ping

If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)

Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.

FR is our public radio/tv. Support FR! The Fall Telethon is underway!

[Ditto]

DoI Bump.