MajorT wrote:Hi Andy,
This book has been hyped here as bbeing co-authored by an "eminent military historian".
To me it shows all the classic signs of bait trailing for a conspiracy theory.
If authors can come on AHF, put up their publisher's PR puff and decline to answer questions on that PR puff's content, then the site becomes no more than a marketing tool for a few financially interested parties.
To his credit, Gerrard has taken sceptical contributions in good part, perhaps on the grounds that "any publicity is good publicity" in marketing terms. However, in the past, some authors have used the device of stickies to promote their book, accept fulsome praise from some friendly contributors and yet refuse to justify their books when pressed by other more sceptical contributors.
If authors want to use AHF to promote their books, they must expect the content of their contributions there, not just their book, to come under scrutiny.
Hi Major T
The obvious way to stop the bait-trailing (if thats what you believe this discussion to be so far) is to stop feeding from the bait trail in the first place.
Well I see no reason as to why the word eminent is an issue. The dictionary term seems to some up it up quite well:-
Well-Known and Well-Respected To some extent is all about perception but the fact that you yourself have some of his titles, tells me that unless you bought them for the pictures something about the authors narrative/style or knowledge appealed to you. I'm guessing that a guy who has 50books from a rather decent publishing outfit like Osprey has some gravitas and game. Were not getting into a character assessment of this co-author because of your dislike for the word eminent-Thats the end of it.
I credit the membership of the AHF especially those that inhabit the Research sections as having more nounce than your willing to give them credit for. We all know the PR stuff is mouthwash for those with halitosis but we have a choice to either swallow it or spit it out. Yes to some extent when we discuss a book (either new, re-issued or old) its a form of marketing and we have no issue with that. However nobody is suggesting that it should be a one-way glad handing exercise for the authors,publishers and marketing/PR people-and this thread is a perfect example of this.
Anyway thats a lock on this particular aspect of the conversation Major T. I'm aware of your POV and standpoint as you are of mine. I have no intention of going round the houses with you on this, so please dont waste our time by posting a response.
I'm half minded to lock this thread until the actual book has been published and somebody other than the author has read it and can comment with some knowledge about what the book contains. But I wont for the moment but please dont start baiting or start personnel vendettas because then I wont just lock the thread but remove it.
Regards to all