Jan 22, 2010
Are you lying to your audience if you use ghostwriters?
Like this post?
Recently I heard a blogger I admire is actually several writers.
This seems dishonest, but perhaps I’m overreacting.
What do you think?
(Image)
* * * * *
© 2012 Abuyo. All rights reserved.
I have no idea, but your picture is uber creepy.
Agreed.
I definitely shuddered.
i like it. then again, i’m a big sci-fi fan.
I felt the same way when I found out the Hardy Boys weren’t written by the stated author but by numerous authors.
also The Babysitters Club!!
What?!
REALLY!!??! I don’t know why I’m so freaked out about that.
Do you have a source for that? I knew about Nancy Drew and the Hardy Boys but I was still under the impression that Ann M. Martin did/does her own writing.
“Ms. Martin, who wrote more than 60 of the books in the original “Baby-Sitters Club” series . . .”
there were definitely a lot more than 60, so i could only conclude . . .
Ooh yeah… there were a over a hundred not even including the “mysteries” and “super specials,” but it’s not like there is a closet at my parents’ house with shelves stacked full of them or anything :) Thanks for the link I am disappointed to learn that.
The Hardy Boys were ghostwritten? Aw, man – another piece of childhood trampled on… =D
I only found that out recently.
I think I was more devastated when I finally learned what the word ‘fiction’ meant (ah, elementary school).
I hope you’re not referring to Andrew Sullivan, because if you are… *shudders*
Great graphic!
-Joel
I think it’s dishonest. It’s so simple to say: Here’s our team of writers. Why do you need to pretend to be something you’re not?
Exactly.
I thought he was referring to MollyPiper.com
Ouch! (I’m waiting for Abraham’s post tomorrow: “By the way, this blog is really 22 Writers! Muwhahahaha!”)
What I was going to say, but better worded.
agreed.
I’d be mad if I found out you had a couple people writing as “Abraham Piper”.
But if you and a couple other people blogged as “Bob Boberson”, I’d maybe be a little disappointed to hear that Bob wasn’t real, but not mad.
I felt cheated when I found out that Nancy Drew books were ghostwritten. And I read a ton of other books like that…Saddle Club. I think it’s kinda like Babysitters Club with horses. And I would also be disappointed if I found out that a bunch of different people were Abraham Piper.
Oh my goodness! Nancy Drew?! I am heartbroken. There goes my childhood.
Nancy Drew too?!? What is this world coming to?
I don’t know if I’d be mad. They might lose my trust and probably loyalty, but not mad.
If it is, would using a pseudonym be dishonest as well?
(For the record, all my posts and comments are written by me.)
No, you’re not overreacting. It’s deeply disingenuous, and often harmful to the careers of those who do the ghostwriting. For every Nancy Pearcey (who ghost-wrote a number of Chuck Colson’s books), there are a hundred people who we never hear of.
Matt
I think it’s something that should be disclosed. It’s an honesty/integrity thing.
Heard about Guy Kawasaki doing this. I believe it’s disclosed on his Twitter bio now.
Jay Leno has writers for his monologue. President Obama uses speechwriters. I’m cool with that. But I think a personal blog should have some transparency about who’s writing
Agreed.
Yup.
(Comment written by me and/or members of my staff.)
Good one. :)
I agree it’s okay for the president, or television personalities – it’s general knowledge that they use speechwriters. Even though I think it’d be neat if they’d write some themselves. (Abraham Lincoln certain didn’t use a ghostwriter for the Gettysburg Address!)
Yes, because all our current political candidates are of the same caliber as Lincoln.
;)
I recently found out similar (maybe the same) news. I unsubscribed. Even though I know and trust the ghost writers, I’d rather just read their blogs.
If you don’t have time to write your own blog, then I don’t have time to read it.
I guess it would depend on a couple of things (imo):
1) What type of blog/blogger is it? Is it a personal blog, or a professional/marketing blog, etc.
2) Is the blogger *hiding* the fact that he/she has multiple writers, or is it just not immediately evident?
I can definitely see the feeling of being deceived, especially if the blog is a personal sort of thing and/or is written from a first-person/one person’s perspective.
It would (does)make me sad. Plus, that poor writer doesn’t get the deserved credit.
I don’t have a problem with a pseudonym. I see them as being different.
I’m with you, AP. It’s not honest and I see no reason to mislead anyone on that point. One of my favorite blogs is Pyro, they make clear what’s going on and everything’s on the table. Simple enough.
Absolutely, you are being dishonest. Every word, article, and punctuation mark is part of the writer;s personality, intention, and style. Hemingway searched his entire career for “one true sentence”. I want to read what the writer wrote. It is kind of like wearing too much makeup . . . .
“My two top writers, my crack team, my fun squad…You came in here pitching me the idea of hiring another writer?”
“Yeah. Miles finch.”
(sorry, I couldn’t resist)
Let’s do this!
Depends. In a situation where Tom Clancy’s name is on the book for the branding but the ghost writer is credited I just consider Clancy a sell-out. Same with some of the series mentioned (I learned about the Boxcar Children being ghost-written after the first few and never minded, although you can tell a quality difference). But you have to credit the ghostwriters!
If I have someone else write a paper for school they call it plagiarism and I get kicked out of school for lying. If you wrote it, you wrote it. If someone else wrote it that means you didn’t write it. If you claim you wrote it then you are lying.
not a fan of ghostwritten blogs.
i’m interested in a person’s thoughts. not several person’s writing as if they were that person
I heard you have 22 different authors for your blog, each contributing a word. Is that true?
Rhett
That would be nice.
What a challenge: 22 writers each contribute one word, you (AP)compile the blog post, and randomly assign the credit to whomever!
Yes, it’s dishonest. Unless the identity of the co-author/ghostwriter is disclosed, the fact that it’s published under someone else’s name indicates that it’s calculated to deceive the intended audience.
Whether in books or blogs, it is a dishonest way to expand the brand of a person who does not have the time (or skill in some cases) to write on their own.
Giving obvious credit clears up most of my misgivings. As long as it says “Based on the work of…” or “Written with…” I don’t have that much of a problem with it. But masking the ghostwriter’s identity in order to sell more copies or gather more readers is insincere at best.
When Joel helped me do some research using LOGOS software, one of the resources was “quotes” and “illustrations”…
this rocked my world – my previous assumption was that if you had an illustration from someone, you had read the source and got the illustration from context.
When Joel and I found out that someone we know writes for more “famous” other Christians…
feels like they are more worried about the power of their name, then that the content is truth.
Boo
That applies to sermons as well.
I have trouble distinguishing where having someone ghostwrite for you and plagiarizing are different…
Ghostwriters give their permission to not receive credit for their work….
Plagiarizers take others’ work without permission.
I think that readers tend to feel like they “know” the author, especially in highly social settings like the Internet. They perhaps fell that they own a piece of that person, in a sense. The rockstar mentality. So when they find out their relationship was based on falsehood, a dissonance occurs.
So I think the reader is in part to blame. Though I do think it’s dishonest and I don’t see the need for it.
I make a distinction between a professional blogger and one who does so personally. It seems unreasonable to think that someone like Andrew Sullivan could possibly write all his own posts, so, no, I don’t feel misled or lied to in any way. But if my friend who writes a blog about her baby had ghostwriters (and none of them were her husband), that would be another matter entirely.
Bill – Plagarism is stealing someone elses content without permission and Ghost-writing is getting paid to write other people’s content.
There are various stages of editing as well, so then, how far is too far in the editing process?
One simple way to ‘be above reproach’ on this issue is to simply say ‘with Ghostwriter with Mad Skills’.
However, I know guys who have ghostwritten, and they feel fine with it, because they are articulating an author’s idea, which in their minds (the idea) is what is of value. They merely put ‘meat on the bones’.
Personally, I think Ghost-writers should be acknowledged publicly, but what do I know?
He who is faithful in little will be faithful in much. From where I sit right now, you can’t be too honest. When David Mathis writes a first draft for me, his name goes on the letter.
JP
Yes. What Dr. Piper said.
Suck up! ;-)
The ‘Dr.’ part or the agreement? ;-)
I thought he was talking about DesiringGod.org…
i don’t know. for me, it’s the dr. piper thing. he’s “pastor john” or “piper”. some are speculating that he might be PEOPLE magazine’s next “sexiest man alive”, but he’ll just be “pastor john” to me.
Generally, I agree with you. I think it’s somewhat dishonest, though (as with so many other things in life) I think it goes back to the motive for doing so. I could see how someone might begin writing/publishing under a different name to gain confidence. I could also see how someone might want to write under a different name to test the quality of the work, especially if geared toward a different audience rather than just having a successful (or unsuccessful) publication simply based upon prior reputation.
Kingdom building perhaps? When people have a highly trafficked blog and don’t have the time to write, maybe they employ writers as good (if not better) than them to keep content flowing without being able to tell the difference. How else can you write books, speak at conferences, lead organizations/churches, have a family life, etc.?
Of course, I’m not saying that it is ethical or correct. That just seems to be the rationale.
when I found out Perez Hilton had ghostwriters, I wasn’t all that surprised. but I don’t really respect him in the first place, so it didn’t matter.
if I found out seth godin has ghostwriters I’d be sad. part of my love and respect for his site is believing that he comes up with that daily nugget all by himself. but maybe that’s fantasy. and maybe credit is due for bloggers who maintain that fantasy for us – but the key to keeping it fantasy is to not get caught, I suppose.
and ideally, I guess honesty would be the best policy :)
Definitely trust breaker. But what’s it worth? You’re reading free content. You’ll get over it and go back to reading it eventually…but with a little hesitation in your approach, of course.
Are they Christians? Then you’re not overreacting. If they’re not, why are you surprised?
As a professional ghostwriter and editor, I obviously don’t think it’s dishonest. My client’s thoughts are what bring the most value. My job is simply to write them well.
You have to ask yourself, what constitutes authorship? Is it that you did the technical work of sitting down and writing, or is it that you came up with a killer idea and have a great platform that no one else has.
For those that equate ghostwriting with plagiarism, they’re not the same. plagiarism is stealing someone’s ideas without giving them credit. Ghostwriting is hiring someone to make your ideas as best presented as they can be. Ghostwriters don’t come up with ideas. They help present them well.
In the case of this blog in question. One name for three different people is kind of stupid (I think), but not dishonest. There is plenty of precedent for this type of thing in literary history.
I’ve been shaking my head at the idea of ghostwriters (and I’ve been one!) – hating the intentional or unintentional deceit involved (I think of Pastor John Piper’s definition: “any twisting of the truth is a lie”) – but something about your comment made me recall that God used a number of ghostwriters in Scripture, but He did make most of the ghostwriter authorship known. He still does uses ghostwriters today — those who write by the guidance of His Spirit. Hmm.
I agree with your sentiments…I used to be a ghostwriter for a celebrity pastor…
The question I’d ask these bloggers is: why would you not disclose the authors?
I can’t think of a noble answer to the question.
Could it be argued that ghost-writing is analogous to performance-enhancing drugs in baseball or Olympics? The “performance” of one’s blog is increased to a level of excellence and output that other individual bloggers simply cannot perform. This puts them at an advantage that, in the sports-arena, categorizes them as cheaters.
I think that’s why the honesty issue is important for Christians. If you’re on blog steroids, just admit it.
I don’t think the steroids analogy is quite right. What would be closer is that of a performer having an engineer or producer to help him sound great.
For example, the Beatles wouldn’t have been the Beatles without producer George Martin. He took what they wrote, and helped them put it into world-class form. (Listen to a demo tape versus a final recorded song to hear the difference.)
Despite his contribution, Martin (appropriately) was not credited as being one of the Beatles. Neither was he wasn’t given song-writing credit either. That does not make his contribution dishonest. He wanted the boys from Liverpool to put out great songs, and he helped them do it.
A good ghost writer fulfills a similar function. And ideally, that person would be acknowledged is some way, though that doesn’t always mean sharing credit on the cover or title page.
I write all my own stuff. People know this because I routinely make a fool of myself.
what?! no ghostwriter?! #unfollow. ;-)
To me, it doesn’t matter.
Obviously to others it does.
It doesn’t matter to me because changing the author does not change the content.
“Unfamous person Y” writing something and passing it off as “famous person X,” doesn’t change the validity of the content. What it does change is our perception of the content, and the authority we place on it…because of “famous person X.”
I think that if it really makes that big of a deal, we’re not reading it for the content. We’re reading it because we think “famous person X” is writing it, and we’d like it no matter what it was.
I see this as more of a problem with the reader, not the author.
But of course it’s a personal opinion and obvious over-generalization.
I have small blog group on facebook which I used as a launchpad for my blogsite. My group on facebook says that “I and a team of contributors put out a weekly email of encouragement..etc.” It’s not that big or necessarily the most organized; so most of the time I do most of the work. Some may think that the word “contributors” could be analogous to a paid staff. Leading to people on to making the blog a “serious operation” of ministry. However I think that contributors can be validated: people comment, the Holy Spirit works through me, friends offer suggestions and advice that works itself into a blog. I think a wise christian is never alone. I think saying contributors hinders pride of the main writer and hinders a messiah complex relationship occurring with its readers. It also gives the group a more inclusive first impression.
I wonder why there’s some resistence to the idea that, for example, Pastor X allows his media intern to write his daily blog, but the plain fact that there are literally thousands of blogs written by completely-anonymous and therefore unaccountable people spin out of countrol daily?
It seems to me the former is exercising authority and good judgment and the latter is the real affront.
I read several team blogs – but I know they are team blogs. It wouldn’t sit well with me if I found out that the author of many posts was many people when I’d been led to think it was one.
I missed a verb in the first sentence, but consider it my new dialect. :-)
Ha.
I’ve done some ghostwriting for print media in the past, and for that I totally agree with the ghostwriter/editor above. The idea is completely the author’s (or in my case, the speaker’s… I worked with sermon transcriptions). My job was simply to take the ideas and tweak the wording until it was readable. My goal was to preserve as much of the original voice as possible… my goal was really to be invisible. Much like the example above of a music producer.
Now, if a writer conceives the idea, crafts the post, publishes it, and then someone else’s name is put on it who had nothing to do with the process… I think I do actually have a problem with that. In cases like those, I’m much more impressed with people who openly build a blogging team of like-minded authors.
Carolyn Keen, Franklin Dixon, Laura Lee Hope are all pseudonyms of the Stratmeyer Syndicate. [Nancy Drew, Hardy Boys, Bobbsey Twins]. Those are just three of their “authors.”
Shakes up a kid’s life to find that out, huh?
It depends. I was on a ministry team where the director did not have a lot of time for writing, and she didn’t feel like a strong writer. So she would give me an outline of everything she wanted in her “from the director’s desk” column for the newsletter. I write up a basic, informational column. She wrote a personal closing and signed her name. I don’t really see anything wrong with that.
Yet I think that people running for public office should write their own speeches (although others could help polish them up a bit without actually rewriting them). It just doesn’t seem right for someone to win an election because he or she had a more talented speech writer.
And I agree with those who said that a team of writers should be recognized as a team.
As for using pen names. I don’t see anything wrong with that either. Not knowing the writer personally sometimes helps us enjoy and gain information from writing without all of the baggage that sometimes comes with a writer.
–Wish E. Washy
A book maybe… but a blog?
This is so wrong and I have been chosen to stop it.
And so have I.
every editor is a ghost writer in a sense. so most people who publish books have had a “ghostwriter” helping them write. i don’t think it’s so dishonest…most people need editors.
So, Abraham Piper wrote the Baby-Sitters Club books? I feel…so betrayed.
Authorship is a different thing than editing. If someone is taking credit by placing their name as the byline, then I would certainly take that to mean they were in fact the author. To have their writing merely edited is just that…editing. But to flat out “ghost write” and paste a different name on it representing a different author is just a lie. It just is. I don’t know how we could say that it isn’t.
Ghost writing is bad. unless you are telling people that you are using a ghost writer. think milli vanilli.(My daughter wrote this.)
I think it is a bit dishonest to claim one person if there is more. If one’s blog is done by several people they should just say so, there’s nothing wrong with it; and it can add to the character of the site.
If the main reason you read the blog was because of the enjoyable personality exhibited by the writer (who turned out to be multiple writers) then you’re unlikely to continue reading the blog now that you know their secret. However I’d be impressed that a team of writers could so convincingly craft a cohesive and enjoyable personality.
Still, if the blog is good enough then you’ll get over it.
Next you’re going to tell me that Goosebumps are ghost written! Please tell me that R. L. Stine had a little character!
Someone mentioned that plagiarism is claiming someone else’s work without his permission, but that is not exactly true.
If someone asks his friend to write part of a school paper for him, or if he asks to borrow a paper that the friend wrote, and then turns it in as his own work, that is still plagiarism even if the friend says it’s okay.
Now after reading more of the comments, I think John Piper’s advice is probably best–be totally clear about who is writing what all the time.
Jerry Falwell had a gay ghostwriter,
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Wolves/ghostwriters.htm
I learned a number of years ago that my uncle’s niece wrote for the president of a college I am pretty sure you are intimately acquainted with. I was incredibly disillusioned. It did seem dishonest. Deceitful. Several years later, I was subcontracting for her and she asked me to write a few articles that the same president signed off on as his – with a few edits. I love knowing I wrote those articles, and I hate knowing it was me that wrote them.