ForumGarden

The are current allegations that a book Oprah selected for her "book list" (A Million Little Pieces) is filled with fraud. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/01 ... frey1.html

I can't help but be reminded of the journalistic fraud of Stephen Glass.

http://www.cheatingculture.com/stephenglass.htm

If proven true, I believe James Frey should have to return all the profits from his book to a charity of Oprah's choosing, since Oprah's "book list" helped him onto the New York Times bestseller list, thereby drawing in more profits for him.

What say you?

Who reads Oprhah's List in the first place?

I don't. Shedoesn't dictate my reading selections-in fact, she could broaden some of hers.

Minks Jr. is reading that book, and finds it very interesting.

I didn't intend to disrespect "Minks" in any way by this thread. I thought of placing this thread in the same forum section as "Minks," but chose this section so as not to be confrontational with another member, and I felt the "General Forums" was fitting.

Most TV viewers are well aware of the impact Oprah's "book list" has on the American reading public. That's not rocket science. It appears like Oprah got hood-winked. She doesn't strike me as the type of women that would accept that. I hope she doesn't. I hope she makes it right, if the allegations are proven true.

Maybe Oprhah should stick to TV, and leave the book stuff alone. She doesn't influence my reading selections. If she is gong to endorse something, then she has to be responsible for her selections.

chonsigirl wrote: Maybe Oprhah should stick to TV, and leave the book stuff alone. If she is gong to endorse something, then she has to be responsible for her selections.


I believe Oprah has a right to her freedom of expression under the 1st Amendment of the Constitution, which would include offering her views on books, as well as hosting her TV show. They are not mutually exclusive. From viewing her ventures over the years, I anticipate Oprah will "be responsible" in her final response to this alleged scandal. If she was an unknowing party to fraud, I can only imagine what her corrective action will be, given an entire cast of audience members walked away with new cars.

Oprah's response to this unclosure will be interesting.

I read both books (AMLP and My Friend Leonard) and still think they are great. WEther its embellished or not, I say, who cares? Its helping thousands of addicts with hope and knowledge that they can achieve sobriety and helping thousands of "non-addicts" cope with and understand addicts.

I stand behind the message in this book one thousand percent!

I think the question of semantics is what is at the heart of this.

Non-fiction (true) or Fiction (fabrication)

It is fraud to say it is true and get the backing he got for the book under these circumstances.

As a plain fiction book, would it have been so aclaimed and generated such hope in people? I think not.

SOJOURNER wrote:

As a plain fiction book, would it have been so aclaimed and generated such hope in people? I think not.


I would have to disagree. I think it would.

DesignerGal wrote: I would have to disagree. I think it would.


But if it is not a true experience it is just a STORY about would could be, not what was. The hope comes in duplicating the success of the author. Since the author did not fall to the depths he wrote about, his rise was not that dramatic.

Ive read plenty of fiction books and have "developed" inspiration/courage/knowledge from them to be a better person. Two come to mind: The Cider House Rules and The Good Earth. I also have read several books by Jodi Piccoult about suicide and terminal illness that have had a profound effect on how I view these things when they happen around me. I guess its up to the reader.

Wether its fiction or non, its a possible situation with possible successes and possible failures.

DesignerGal wrote: Ive read plenty of fiction books and have "developed" inspiration/courage/knowledge from them to be a better person. Two come to mind: The Cider House Rules and The Good Earth. I also have read several books by Jodi Piccoult about suicide and terminal illness that have had a profound effect on how I view these things when they happen around me. I guess its up to the reader.

Wether its fiction or non, its a possible situation with possible successes and possible failures.


HOPE springs eternal!

Inspiration does come from many different sources.

It is, however, all about what we actually do with what we take in.

How I envy the man in Chariots of Fire. His conviction and faith were so strong that he never had to struggle with a decision. He knew what he needed to do and he did it. I so want to be like this man......

SOJOURNER wrote: HOPE springs eternal!

Inspiration does come from many different sources.

It is, however, all about what we actually do with what we take in.

How I envy the man in Chariots of Fire. His conviction and faith were so strong that he never had to struggle with a decision. He knew what he needed to do and he did it. I so want to be like this man......


In the event this is NOT a sarcastic comment, I will add that, this is how I felt towards Homer Wells in Cider House Rules. So simple and innocent and always tried to do the right thing. Ive stopped myself a couple of times from even telling a white lie to embellish a story or event in my life, thinking, "is this what Homer would do?".

DesignerGal wrote: In the event this is NOT a sarcastic comment, I will add that, this is how I felt towards Homer Wells in Cider House Rules. So simple and innocent and always tried to do the right thing. Ive stopped myself a couple of times from even telling a white lie to embellish a story or event in my life, thinking, "is this what Homer would do?".


It was NOT a sarcastic comment.

I truely admire this man. He had such conviction. He loved God He loved to run. When given the opportunity to compete, it was on a Sunday. He did not run on Sunday. Sunday was God's day. He did not compromise. He did not debate the issue. He just continued doing what he had always done, putting God first.

He did compete on another day in a type of race he had never trained for and he was blessed with a victory.

This was a win-win situation. Man has free will to choose and we need to choose well. If you know what you need to do, your decisions are not a struggle.

I saw Cider House Rules and will now watch it again with an eye to what impacted you.

SOJOURNER wrote: It was NOT a sarcastic comment.




My apologies. You never can recognize tone in forums, unless of course you have read the thread about the missing toddler and "pantsonfire's full throttling of shleby b".

I reading One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest. Not sure yet.

I did go to Smoking Gun's website, and there were only allegations that the train wreck and police/jail time events were embellished. In my opinion, the emphasis of this story is on his rehab stint and the drug addiction. Has any of that been discredited?

DesignerGal wrote:

In my opinion, the emphasis of this story is on his rehab stint and the drug addiction. Has any of that been discredited?


I'm not sure.

I had wanted to read the book but as yet had not. After our discussion, I will get it and read it.

Am also going to rewatch Chariots of Fire and Cider House Rules.

To my way of thinking, it's not about semantics or how many angels you can get to dance on the head of a pin. It's about integrity and honesty. If the con-man had said something to the effect of, "The following story lines are fabricated," and continued, that may have passed muster. As it is, the stench of alleged literary fraud doesn't pass the smell test. The offending "author" needs to make it right. I think Oprah has the juice to make that happen.

SnoozeControl wrote: You really should follow that link to "The Smoking Gun"


I did that before authoring the thread. You're right. There's excellent background information there, which is why I posted the link. This might reach higher national porportions, just as past cases of fraud and plagiarism in journalism have. I'm just waiting to see the outcome of Oprah bringing "the hammer down" on this alleged offender. She was quick to give this guy a national platform by her endorsement, let's see if she will play the same card when it comes to his accountability.

:-2

SOJOURNER wrote: Oprah's response to this unclosure will be interesting.


Her response? Should go something like this. . . . "Poor me, I recommened this book to all of my friends, underlings and peons. Oh bother, how will I look when this hits the fan. Whatever shall I do? Tell me, when I flap my arms like this does the underside hit you in the head? No? Then could you stand a little closer? Does my butt look fat in this? I'm sorry, what were we talking about? Oh yeah, the way I was abused as a child? No? Then who cares. WHERE'S MY MIRROR?"



Can you tell I don't like her?

No offense taken here so not to worry.

Sure we can poo poo Oprah and James Frey... but what of the publishing company, they have the ultimate say in weather this is fiction or nonfiction. If they did all their research and they deem it as nonfiction it ought to end there. If proof proves differently go after the publishing company for falsely lableing the book. Heck yea non fiction sells when you can sit there and go HOLY CRAP this really happened. So maybe the publishers were in it for the money.

And hey in Freys' defense, he stated he worked from memory, so if he was an abuser, I bet his memory was full of all sorts of things. That is tough to determine fiction from nonfiction at that point.

I agree with Designergirl, if this book has a positive impact on kids or anyone with tendancies towards substance abuse or crime, then what the heck...read on. Until it is all cleared up I shan't say anything to Jr Minks about this.

SnoozeControl wrote: Sorry, I was replying to the post before you... you sort of snuck in front of me, you queue jumper.


I didn't intend to be a "queue jumper," whatever that is. To argue that it's now the fault of the publisher misses the mark, in my opinion. It was incumbent on all parties (author, publisher, media spin-mister's, etc.) to get it right before release and subsequent proliferation. We'll see if those parties make it right. I'm waiting.

911 wrote:

Can you tell I don't like her?


Yep! :rolleyes:

ChiptBeef wrote: I didn't intend to be a "queue jumper," whatever that is. To argue that it's now the fault of the publisher misses the mark, in my opinion. It was incumbent on all parties (author, publisher, media spin-mister's, etc.) to get it right before release and subsequent proliferation. We'll see if those parties make it right. I'm waiting.


Publisher should have seen it for what is was, and placed it in the appropriate category that is their job, what does a drugged criminal like Frey know about publishing hmmm I would almost think he is a pwan in the publishers big money grab game. He didn't trick anyone....

minks wrote: Publisher should have seen it for what is was, and placed it in the appropriate category that is their job, what does a drugged criminal like Frey know about publishing


There is credible evidence that his "drugged criminal" state is in question. There is credible evidence that parts of his book are in question. If he can verify the facts as presented, then this pending scandal goes away. The buck stops with the author, since his name is on the final product. Publishers are "middle-men."

SnoozeControl wrote: I've been googling this subject to death, but the Smoking Gun article covers this better than anything else online.

Reality: he got stopped for drunk driving and spent a total of five hours in jail...

What he wrote: he was stoned out of his mind, hit a cop and was pulled kicking and screaming out of his car in front of a crowd of 30 people, and only because of his connections with a head biker guy and a mafioso that he met in rehab was he allowed to skip spending a minimum of 3 years in max security.

Apparently publishers aren't required to verify facts.


Actually, it wasnt a head biker guy he claims had something to do with it, it was a federal court judge he calls Miles Davis (there is a circuit court judge in New Orleans by this name) from New Orleans that helped him with the jail time. As for Leonard "the mafioso", he doesnt do anything to help James with jailtime in the book. He only helps in other areas, financially and staying in rehab mainly. Im just wondering, did you read it?

SnoozeControl wrote: Nope, I'm only repeating what I remember from reading the link. You might be able to verify how accurate it is since you have read the book.

Don't you think you'll feel sort of cheated of your emotions if this is all bogus? It seems like a cheap trick that's manipulated an awful lot of people.


in a word

kinda

SnoozeControl wrote: Nope, I'm only repeating what I remember from reading the link. You might be able to verify how accurate it is since you have read the book.

Don't you think you'll feel sort of cheated of your emotions if this is all bogus? It seems like a cheap trick that's manipulated an awful lot of people.


I dont think so. I mean, even if its fictional. I got something out of it. There is no doubt in my mind he was an addict and he addict feelings and tendancies and he goes into detail in the book.

I dated an alcoholic when I was 21 and broke up with him because he was. I hated AA meetings and al-anon meetings and his belligerant, nonsensical rants when he was drunk. Now, after reading this book I get a little better understanding of an addict and why they behave the way they do. The details that The Smoking Gun is dicrediting are minor, very minor details in the book as a whole. I might support and stick with an alcoholic friend or family member now, instead of writing them off because "its too much of a waste of time dealing with them" and not helping them out.

It's not about the feelings. It's about the factual. Those that publish under their own name must be accountable. If it is touted as fiction, no problem. This was played off as an auto-biography; a work of fact from the author's life. Since the record alleges his biography was not factual, he should have to pay back the profits, if it is proven he engaged in fraud. Period. End of story. :-5

Oprah Winfrey continues to support this case of written fraud even after the facts are exposed. To add insult to injury, she also tries to put the blame on the publisher, rather than the author. She had the opportunity to make it right, but chose not to take it. But the money keeps rolling in.......

http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/books/01/11/frey.lkl/

ChiptBeef wrote: Oprah Winfrey continues to support this case of written fraud even after the facts are exposed. To add insult to injury, she also tries to put the blame on the publisher, rather than the author. She had the opportunity to make it right, but chose not to take it. But the money keeps rolling in.......



http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/books/01/11/frey.lkl/


Whats your problem now?:-2

StupidCowboyTricks wrote: Whats your problem now?:-2
The fraud and the subsequent support of it.

ChiptBeef wrote: The fraud and the subsequent support of it.


But did he plagiarize?:sneaky: -lol

StupidCowboyTricks wrote: But did he plagiarize?-lol
No allegations like that on this thread. I haven't seen allegations like that in my research. Maybe you know something the rest of us don't. You could make "breaking news!!!!" Go for it. You might be able to make a buck or two.

Depends on the interpretation. Kind of like "It depneds on what the definition of "is" is."

ChiptBeef wrote: Depends on the interpretation. Kind of like "It depneds on what the definition of "is" is."


That's plagiarism!

Have at it.

StupidCowboyTricks wrote: That's plagiarisism!
I quoted from a known public lexicon in the public domain, using proper quotation marks. That's not plagiarism. Better luck next time.

Slick Willie made a similar statement in response to his actions as an officer of the United States, making his statement part of the public domain, to wit a reprint even without quotation marks would be acceptable under the "fair use doctrine." Carry on.

SnoozeControl wrote: See, that was sort of funny when I said "turn me into admin" cuz then I'd be Anastrophe and his clothes wouldn't fit me...



Oh, never mind!












....................................... Wahhh!