(NOTE: In my previous post on subTweeting I neglected to mention “vaguebooking”, which is the same thing as subTweeting only it takes place on Facebook.)
I didn’t really pay attention to Abbi Glines until informed she was republishing one of her novels…but with added explicit content. (From here: “10,000 more words have been added. Explicit, adult sexual content…All those moments that faded to black no longer fade but you follow them right on through to the end. For mature readers only.”) As a fan of authors such as Tiffany Reisz and Megan Hart, I’m totally cool with erotic content – with ANY content – as long as it adds value to the story. Otherwise, it’s just gratuitous and has no real purpose being there, which is what it sounds like in Ms. Glines’s case.
DISCLOSURE: I currently do blog comment approval/mark-as-spam for Jenny Trout. When I saw Ms. Glines’s comment, I went to Twitter – where it was plain to all and sundry that she was subTweeting about Ms. Trout. Jenny called out Ms. Glines for subTweeting, and a fellow user asked about subTweeting. I tried to explain. The question of “But how do you KNOW whom/what is the subject of a subTweet?” came up, and I realised that the best way to explain how readers know whom subTweets concern is to provide examples.
Tez’s examination of Ms. Glines’s comment:
“I hope I never bash another author’s words, especially if I haven’t read their book first and formed my own opinion.” –Abbi Glines
Ms. Trout never said anything about bashing the book – just reading it and inviting blog readers to read along, too.
“Jamie McGuire is a human being. She has feelings. She works hard. She wrote Beautiful Disaster while she was struggling to pay the bills and keep her babies fed. She overcame so much.” –Abbi Glines
Tez Says: “[insert author name here] is a human being. She has feelings. She works hard. She wrote [all her books] while she was struggling to pay the bills and keep her babies fed. She overcame so much.” You see what’s going on here? Those same words could be said about anyone, even Ms. Trout, yet Ms. Glines seems so quick to blame her for SOMETHING THAT HAS YET TO, AND MAYBE WON’T, HAPPEN. Ms. Glines just automatically assumed the worst.
“Maybe one day we can all grow up and take the high road. Respecting others isn’t hard to do. It’s a simple rule we should all follow. This world would be a better place.” –Abbi Glines
You know who DIDN’T “grow up and take the high road” or respect others? Ms. McGuire, when she subTweeted her “glitter-canon” celebration of Ellora’s Cave’s defamation suit against Dear Author. Usually when an author has something positive to say about a publisher, they NAME THE PUBLISHER. That Ms. McGuire didn’t is a clear example of subTweeting. Because subTweeting in favour of a publisher that has allegedly failed to revert publication rights to authors, and has also allegedly failed to pay some authors, editors, and other stuff in a timely manner is taking “the high road” in Ms. Glines’s opinion? But “it’s a simple rule we should all follow” – except for Ms. McGuire? Would this world REALLY “be a better place” with more people who share in Ms. McGuire’s schadenfreude?
And then came Ms. Glines’s subTweeting, which I’ll present in a Storify so that it’s easily apparent as to why readers know about whom Ms. Glines subTweets: SubTweeting: The Glines Edition.
Tez’s examination of Ms. Glines’s remarks (and if the links don’t work, Ms. Glines may have deleted them):
And how is calling Ms. Trout “a sad individual. And you suck” a prime example of being “kind to each other”? Oh, it’s not. See, the problem I have with false-positive people is that they’re negative about “negative people”. At least “negative people” are honest and upfront instead of pretending to be positive and caring, when really the false-positive people aren’t any less negative than the “negative people”.
Again, you’re continuing the cycle of negativity. Being negative towards a “negative person” does not make you “positive”.
I call you false-positive. Still not the worst thing anyone could call you, so you can also take that.
And there you have it, ladies and gentlemen. Now that you’ve seen subTweeting in action you know what it is, and why it’s so obvious about whom Ms. Glines was subTweeting.