Showing posts with label Lonely Planet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lonely Planet. Show all posts
Don't judge a guidebook by its cover: but should you judge it by its brand?
Yesterday I provided some tips on how to choose a guidebook, my advice being don't judge a guidebook by its cover, judge it by its author, just as you would any other book. The way I see it, if you're buying a novel (compelling story aside) you're buying the book based on the author's talent, skills, reputation and body of work. You're not buying the book based on the publisher. You don't think: "Ooohhh, HarperCollins published that book, I just have to read it!" Because HarperCollins or Picador or Random House or whatever probably publish an equal amount of successes as they do flops (by the way, that's a random statement to prove a point. I haven't checked that, so don't quote me on it). So when I was answering Eric Daams' excellent question about identifying good guidebooks, in response to our Brilliant Minds post, it never occurred to me to mention the brand. And yet the brand plays a role in your purchasing decisions. Right? Mark of Travel Wonders of the World wrote: "If you want to decide on a travel guide book, go down to the local library and select a few... Decide which matches your views/tastes/ideas/values and you have a good chance of choosing a brand which most suits your travelling style. As Lara points out, guidebooks do vary a little in quality by author, but in general they write in a similar style and are typically targetted to a specific audience (backpackers, well-heeled, adventurous, inexperienced, etc). I have my couple of favourite brands like most people that most suit my approach to travel."But let's say I suggested that you decide on your guidebook 'brand' first (then the author), you need to decide which brand you identify with. Are you a Lonely Planet, DK, Rough Guides or Footprint reader? And what does that mean? The way I used to look at it when I was younger, Lonely Planet was for 20-something backpackers on frugal budgets; Rough Guides were for slightly older (30-something), more educated (explained by the 'Contexts' chapter) independent travellers; DK was for more discerning travellers with more money; and Footprint were for more adventurous and more intrepid folk. But is that really how things are? The more I travelled and the more involved I became in guidebook publishing, the more complex I realized things were. Older travellers also carried Lonely Planets. Younger travellers also carried DK. And once we started working for publishers, another layer of complexity was added. Our Lonely Planet editors made it clear their audience was much wider than we'd thought. My DK editors said their readers were interested in quality budget places as much as top end options. So if the audiences for these books was wide in terms of age and spending power, how was a brand's readers' classified? Was it, as Mark suggests, more to do with views, tastes, ideas and values? Well, views and tastes were never a topic of conversation with our editors. Yet ideas and values were. Lonely Planet sees its readers, just for starters, as humanists, as environmentally conscious, and politically aware. But then so do Rough Guides. (Just take a look at their Contexts chapters). And DK? Well, they're owned by the same company as Rough Guides. And Footprints? I'd say they're the same. So if the audiences for these books have similar values and ideas - according to each of their publishers - what about their tastes? But hang on a minute, taste is reflected in the choices made as to what to include in the book. Which restaurants and hotels to put in and which to leave out, which shops to add and which should stay out. These decisions are made by the author, not by the editors or company staff. So, what does taste have to do with the brand? Once again, it boils down to the content of the book. And the producer of the content is the author. Not the brand. What do you think? I think it's time for a poll.
Our Lonely Planet Syria and Lebanon guidebook: the challenges of guidebook research and other considerations
Our research last year for the Syria chapter of our recently released Lonely Planet Syria and Lebanon guidebook required that we visit everything already in the book, along with many more sights that weren't in the guide. And while we loved visiting all of those "out of the way castles and ruins", when making decisions as to what to include and exclude in the manuscript we have to think about how much other readers might enjoy what may appear to be merely a pile of rubble to anyone but the most avid archaeological enthusiast. In some cases, the ruins of a castle may be rather spectacular (like the one pictured) and may well be worth the effort to get to. But most readers, who are staying in Syria for an average of five days, might not want to spend a long day travelling (or indeed several days) to get to the site, especially if the journey involves long waits between buses in the middle of nowhere and perhaps even a spot of hitchhiking to get there.The other consideration we have is word count. We can't just keep adding sights to books, and therefore adding paragraphs and pages. In fact, for almost every book we ever worked on for Lonely Planet we were required to reduce rather than add new text. So, in order to add a few paragraphs to include some of those off-the-beaten-track places some readers would love us to include, we'd have to remove sights elsewhere. When it comes to making those decisions we have to ask ourselves whether we should cut a popular site that might be visited by thousands of travellers to include an out of the way castle that may get visited by only a few hundred people? And with a country like Syria (and, now, under the current political climate, also Lebanon), we have to give this serious thought. How many people are actually using our book and visiting these places? When we did our six week road trip around Syria we only bumped into around 20 other travellers. We were alone at most major sights.
It would be heavenly to write a book with an endless number of pages and complete freedom to include everything we wanted to. But it would also have to have a fee to match. And that's another interesting consideration. How many publishers are going to pay us to go to all those out-of-the-way sights that might only ever get visited by a few hundred travellers at most? Not Lonely Planet that's for sure. And probably not many other publishers either...
Our Lonely Planet Syria and Lebanon guidebook has hit the shelves!
We've just received our author copies of our recently released Lonely Planet Syria and Lebanon guidebook and I'm rather excited to see it in print as we put a lot of hard work into it. Admittedly, seeing a book for the first time is not as thrilling these days as it once was, especially as we've now written, contributed to and updated around 35 guidebooks. And it's even less exciting when Lonely Planet sends you a few mangled, well-thumbed copies, rather than issues that are hot off the presses and smell freshly printed! The fact that we researched it over a year ago, from April to June 2007, also takes a bit of the edge off it. Just thinking that some of it is already out of date makes me cringe. But such is the nature of publishing - books take forever to get from research through writing to manuscript submission, then through editing and author queries until they finally go to print...I went online to see if there were any reviews of the book yet but unfortunately all I could find were a few Amazon.com reader reviews which, while attached to this edition, are actually for the last edition. Some were written 8 years ago and so apply to an ancient edition while one 2007 review applied to an edition we wrote that was already 4 years old, so obviously some content was out of date when the reader used it. Interestingly though, we used that edition when we were on the road last year and it was in pretty good shape. The way we research is to methodically check everything in the current book as we're travelling from town to town, retaining anything that's still open and is worthwhile, deleting or downgrading anything that's closed or is not as good as it once was, and then looking for places to replace any deletions. One reader writes of that edition: "It only gives you the most popular sites and then a few it claims are "off-the-beaten-track" but really aren't. It misses some of Syria's best out of the way castles and ruins." What he fails to consider is that we all travel differently. Some of us are more intrepid than others, and what might be a well-trodden sight for one reader might be well and truly "off-the-beaten-track" for other less adventurous travellers. And let's face it, Lonely Planet guides are mainstream books aimed to appeal to a wide cross-section of people. As someone who has been to Syria many times, when I next visit I won't be using a Lonely Planet or any other guidebook. My own well-thumbed and rather ragged version of Ross Burns' Monuments of Syria will be enough to guide me.
Pictured? My co-author/husband Terry at one of those out-of-the-way sights that may not be off-the-beaten-track enough for everyone. The first person who can identify the site gets the most mangled copy of the new guides that Lonely Planet sent me! How's that for incentive?
Enriching the experience of travel: it's all about context
I have a secret: despite writing and contributing to some 25 Lonely Planet guidebooks, I have to admit I've always preferred Rough Guides - primarily for their fantastic Contexts chapters at the back of the books. While many guidebook publishers have been cutting back on word counts in the history, politics and culture chapters of their guides over recent years (yes, I'm talking about you, Lonely Planet!), Rough Guides have maintained their compelling Contexts chapters. These comprehensive sections sometimes stretch to 50 pages or more, demonstrating an appreciation that this is the kind of fascinating stuff that really enriches a traveller's experience of a place, helping us to understand a culture and get beneath the skin of a destination. Context is therefore a fitting name for the first-rate organization with whom we recently did a number of very cool workshops and walking tours in Rome. More on Context and context soon!
Strange Planet (part 4) or How I learnt to stop worrying and love the Lonely Planet Loophole
by Terry Carter* Oh yes, there's more... So far this Lonely Planet thing is a mess of contradictions and odd confessions. Surely the guy who photocopied and stapled together the first copies of a Lonely Planet guide by hand on his kitchen table will come to the rescue and sort out this nonsense once and for all. Cue Lonely Planet co-founder and travel industry legend, Tony Wheeler:
…accepting free car hire from a tourist office would not be "a major problem". "That doesn't disappoint me..."
Well, Tony, it disappoints me. And my bank manager. I still have the receipts for cars hired across several countries, for several Lonely Planet books, going back several years. Shall I send them care of the BBC, or directly to you? I hear you’re pretty flush these days. I’ll expect a nice little nought on the end of my bank balance next week. Enough about my out of pocket expenses, though, back to the oddly twisting scandal. So now even the co-founder of the cultish company is admitting that certain kinds of freebies aren’t a problem. Admittedly, free car hire is an obtuse example, especially if it’s organized by the tourism people, so it’s not that bad. The Lonely Planet is still on its orbit, it just wobbled a little. Still looks beautiful from space. Thanks for reading! And drive safely. Drive Avis. What? He says more about not accepting freebies?
“From my perspective this is an impossible standard to meet," he says.
You have to be kidding me. But you, Tony Wheeler, put that standard in place. Your perspective? You ran the company. What not change this to a goal that is achievable? Why not have a more nuanced policy? Why say this now? But could it get any worse than the co-founder of LP stating that he never expected his writers to refuse comps? For the love of Lonely Planet, please let it stop. But it doesn’t…
When asked whether Lonely Planet was betraying the trust of its readers by insisting it did not take freebies, he says curtly: "Well, that's what you'll have to say, won't you?"
Sweet Jesus. OK. I’ll run with that. I’m no newspaper editor, but I swear that my headline would have read something more insightful than ‘A guide delusion makes it Lonely at the top’. I don’t even understand what that means. I’m not sure it’s even English. Here’s a more accurate and revealing headline, if I do say so myself: LONELY PLANET CO-FOUNDER SAYS COMPANY BETRAYED READERS TRUST. ADMITS WRITERS ACCEPT 'FREEBIES'. Many people in the travel industry see Lonely Planet, its employees and fanatical fans as a kind of cult. I see their point now and I agree to a certain extent, but I never realised it was a doomsday cult. Not sure if I’d be drinking from the water coolers at Lonely Planet headquarters today. Just a thought…
* Terry is my husband, co-author and a photographer. We wrote and contributed to over 25 guidebooks and stacks of other content for Lonely Planet over four years. Take a read of part 1 and part 2 of this strange saga here.
Strange Planet (part 3) or How I learnt to stop worrying and love the Lonely Planet Loophole
By Terry Carter*Hallelujah! On the weekend Peter Munro writing for The Age in Melbourne cleared up the whole Lonely Planet scandal. Thank god that’s over. Yes, we were getting bored with it too. But in the words of Lonely Planet publisher Piers Pickard: “No freebies — period.” Thank you and goodnight! What? Oh, wait, there is a caveat? Sorry, folks. Quotes from the story in italics below.
Peter Munro writes: Are there exceptions? He (Piers) pauses. He says Lonely Planet lets its authors accept free entry to state-run institutions such as museums or national parks.
Phew. Well that’s okay, journalists usually get media passes to these things anyway. We’ve always asked for them. Nothing to see here, move along. Thanks for reading! Oh no, now what?
Prodded further, he says the company also allows freebies when obtained through a tourist office. He says the wording of its policy will be tightened further in future books to close any perceived loophole. Readers, do you know what you can get through a tourist office as a travel writer working on a guide book to a city or country? Sometimes very little. A meeting with the tourism officials, with tea and biscuits and mind-numbing small talk. But most of the time you can get the whole trip paid for. In full. Flights, transfers, meals, hotels, car hire, and VIP treatment the whole way. That’s not a perceived loophole, that’s a free pass to writers such as the couple mentioned in the article who openly admit to taking freebies. But more on these miscreants later. Now back to Piers. Changing the text in the books to "close any perceived loophole" when you allow freebies obtained through a tourist office smells like three-day old fish at an outdoor market. It’s still not clear what the real policy is. And when Lonely Planet stakes its credibility on this, you’d better get it sorted out. But let’s cut Piers some slack. Perhaps he was just a little flustered because of all the media attention over the past couple of weeks. He’s probably as tired as Barack Obama and as nervous as Hillary Clinton. This might account for his weak attempt at spin:
The interest in the scandal is "because of the trust people have in Lonely Planet not because of distrust".
Nice try, but not quite accurate. The interest in the scandal for many is because your customers (your loyal readers) want to know whether they can still trust your books or not. You know, whether you really are the only ‘cleanskin’ guide publisher, who doesn’t accept freebies and visits every establishment. Once again, Lonely Planet has staked its reputation on this, and, as former global publisher Richard Everist puts it in the story, it positions itself as, "being on the side of the angels". You’re the good guys. With integrity and moral fortitude. But there are others, especially in the travel writing industry, who are interested in seeing Lonely Planet get taken down a notch. Including many other publishers who feel that Lonely Planet had been setting themselves up for this by stating the policy in the first place, not paying authors enough to fulfil the promise, or hiring authors who really take advantage of the ‘perceived’ loophole. Astonishingly, the author Peter Munro finds one Lonely Planet author totally in agreement with everything in the paragraph I’ve just written:
New York-based writer Zora O'Neill, who has written guides for several publishers including Lonely Planet, says Lonely Planet uses its official no-freebies policy "to imply it's somehow better, cleaner, more righteous" than its rivals.
To implicitly validate that it’s not better, cleaner and more righteous than its rivals, Zora goes on to commit an act of author disembowelment and perhaps bids farewell to her relationship with Lonely Planet.
Freebies were a necessity "both in terms of dealing with the pay you get and getting to know a place". Lonely Planet author verification teams, once you’ve finished in South America following up Thomas’ tall tales, next stop Egypt. Zora is one of a group of authors who find the best way of “dealing with the pay” and “getting to know a place” is to accept the commission and wink at the loophole, instead of doing the right thing and refusing the commission. Author Paul Hellander is another one of the authors who enjoys the fruits of the loophole provided by Lonely Planet’s policy, but with a twist:
…Paul Hellander, who has worked for Lonely Planet since 1994 on about 35 titles, says flexibility still applies. He argues that while he has never sought a freebie on assignment, he is entitled to accept them regardless of Mr Pickard's protestations. "(The policy) certainly means I can receive a freebie without any real soul-searching because from my view I have not transgressed the line of exchanging content for service," he says. OK. So Lonely Planet has a policy with a ‘perceived’ loophole and Hellander takes guilt-free advantage of it. Lonely Planet says they’re tightening it and Hellander says he’s still ‘entitled’ and flexibility still applies. So, what’s changed? As long as authors with his attitude are still working for Lonely Planet, nothing’s changed.
He says in some countries, such as Greece, the refusal of a free meal or accommodation could offend locals. "If someone says, 'The meal is on me,' I say thank you and walk away," he says. "Lonely Planet would be fooling itself if it sincerely believed its authors had not received a gratuity at some stage."
But Paul, how does the restaurant or hotel know you’re from Lonely Planet? Lara and I have written the Greece chapters (twice) for several Lonely Planet European guidebooks and we've never had a restaurant owner in Greece just randomly give us free meals. And we’ve eaten at many of the restaurants that you’ve reviewed in your books. And we’ve done it while working for Lonely Planet. Here’s a tip: Need to get the correct phone number, opening hours or ask if they’re closed in winter? Ask after you’ve paid the bill. If you end up having to tell them why you need these details and you show them your business card and they insist that the meal is on them, put the money on the table and walk away. We’ve never been chased off a Greek island for paying a bill while working for Lonely Planet and we’ve been in the same situations as you – and I’ve put money on the table and walked away. Plenty of times. I guess we just have a different idea of ‘entitlement’, the kind of entitlement where you show someone your business card, they offer you a freebie and this somehow ‘entitles’ you to accept. After all, you don’t want to offend anyone…
Even more far-fetched is Hellander’s claim that accepting free accommodation is equally a guilt-free practice. Firstly, Paul, you’re letting hoteliers in the industry think that Lonely Planet authors can be bought. (Although unfortunately this isn’t news.) And, yes, hoteliers talk about it to each other. And they don’t see Lonely Planet as any different than all the other guidebook companies. In fact, some see it as being the most cynical and duplicitous of all the guidebook companies. Secondly, it makes it awkward for the next author who can’t be bought while on assignment for Lonely Planet. But soul-searching clearly isn’t your strongest suit. I can probably guess why. There are several other Lonely Planet authors I could name who point to this loophole while accepting freebies for Lonely Planet, but if The Age story is any indicator they’ll probably end up confessing anyway, as if they’re members of some strange cult seeking absolution. Strange indeed.
* Terry is my husband, co-author and a photographer. We wrote and contributed to over 25 guidebooks and stacks of other content for Lonely Planet over four years. Take a read of part 1 and part 2 of this strange saga here.
Fraud or flawed?
Thomas Kohnstamm's book Do Travel Writers Go to Hell? was released yesterday, and despite Lonely Planet's author fraud scandal and the ensuing furor, very few book reviews or follow-up stories have yet to appear. Is everyone just over it all? Here are a couple worth reading: travel writer Robert Reid's The worst guidebook writer ever?' and The Independent's Travel Editor Simon Calder's Travel guide fraud? No, just flawed for the Belfast Telegraph. Also worth a cursory glance are the Sydney Morning Herald/The Age's Do travel writers go to hell?, the Los Angeles Times' Thomas Kohnstamm and the 'Hell' of travel writing, and the Boston Herald's Riddle me this: why do lazy cheaters get rewarded? While I'm a little tired of the controversy, and even more bored with most of the writing about it, I somehow get the feeling this won't be the last we'll hear of it. After all, Thomas is about to hit the festival circuit next month, attending the Sydney Writers Festival and the Auckland Writers Festival, where he'll be running writers workshops. About 'approaches to place' of all things. Hmmm.Pictured? Mhmed, one of the last towns at the edge of the Sahara in Morocco, where a couple of guys are loading their camels for what will obviously be a very long and bumpy ride. Hmmm.
Death of the guidebook?
That's the headline of a story in The Age yesterday written by former Lonely Planet writer Chris Taylor who recounts his discovery that the author who'd updated the China guide before him hadn't visited places himself, but had sub-contracted a cafe owner (who subsequently recruited his cousin!) to do the research instead. Taylor argues that due to increasing competition, guidebooks can't generate the sales revenues to justify the high fees required to ensure the kind of legwork and first-hand research that results in personal recommendations. That Lonely Planet's fees aren't high enough is true, but good writers will still do the legwork. So, is the guidebook dead? Kind of. But this isn't the first time it's been suggested: see The Death of the Guidebook? (The Observer/The Guardian, 2006) and Guidebooks: RIP (The Times, 2007). And I certainly don't believe the Internet killed the guidebook. There are travellers who still prefer discerning critical information written by experts who travel for a living over 'reviews' by people who take holidays once or twice a year. And there are still travellers who prefer carrying a guidebook to printing reams of paper off a website. I don't think all guidebooks will die, just the Lonely Planet style, and by that I mean the mainstream, one-size-fits-all continent and country guides, although I think LP is on the right track with the Encounter guides, as they were with their 'Best Ofs'. As anyone with any kind of marketing sense knows, rarely does one book (or film or CD for that matter) appeal to everyone, and the ones that do, like blockbuster movies or airport novels, tend to be bland, flawed and lack complexity and style. One guidebook can't be all things to all types of travellers, whether it's budget, mid-range or top-end, old or young, singles or couples. When they try to please everyone, they don't do very well at pleasing anyone. However, guidebooks have been taking a different direction for a while now. Consider the success of niche series Wallpaper, for travellers into architecture, art and design, and Luxe, focused at a style-conscious set. Aimed at a narrow target audience, they contain travel content created with their readership firmly in mind. The phenomenal success of Cool Camping, one of the UK's top-selling guidebooks last year, and the outpouring of emotion toward the enchanting hand-crafted Love travel guides are further evidence that travellers want more from their guidebooks. They want guidebooks produced for them. Well, don't we all? What do you think?Whenever I travel around the Middle East, I always find it interesting that tourists from the region don't use guidebooks. Admittedly, they're often pilgrims visiting sites of religious significance, such as these Iranian women in Damascus. But they still visit museums, go shopping, and eat out. They don't speak Arabic but somehow they manage, they find their way around, and they still seem to have a good time.
Decoding Lonely Planet’s explanation
BY TERRY CARTER* Lonely Planet placed a statement on their website in response to Kohnstamm's claims. This is how I read it:
LP: “Thomas claims that during his time as a travel author, he skipped visiting certain destinations, plagiarised from other sources and traded good reviews for in-kind favours.”
Skipping destinations? Plagiarism? This is the first time this has ever happened! I do love ‘in-kind favours’, though, it’s a nice way of phrasing some of Thomas’ deeds. Lonely Planet states in its books that writers ‘don’t take freebies in exchange for positive coverage’, printing the message on authors’ business cards. I’m no lawyer and I don’t play one on TV, but the text is a loophole so big you could drive a Carnival Mardi Gras float through (well, unless Thomas has sold the driver of the float some drugs). The thing is, an LP title is not a phone book and in some ways a review is positive coverage, even if you say ‘the toilets could be cleaner’ or ‘the owner is a grumpy old sod’. It’s in the book and therefore a recommendation and for businesses can mean the difference between LP-carrying kids turning up at your doorstep or bankruptcy. LP has reiterated to writers that there’s a no-comps/discount policy but it hasn’t changed the print on the cards or books, so the loophole still exists. They could have tightened it but haven’t. Why not?
LP: “There are three titles in print to which Thomas has contributed on-the-ground research. The affected titles are Chile & Easter Island (7th edition), South America on a shoestring (10th edition) and Caribbean Islands (4th edition). We have sent out author teams to fact-check all his material in these books.”
I hope they wear rubber gloves and protective clothing. A hint for the intrepid ‘author teams’ (by the way, how many writers does it take to check a guidebook?), it’s probably not a good idea to eat at any of Thomas’ recommended restaurants, but if you do, wipe the tables down first. When one of the ‘author team’ accidentally drops their business card on the floor, it would be a little embarrassing to see one of the staff break down and confess, “I did not have sexual relations with that travel writer!”
LP: “Thomas talks most about his work on Brazil (6th edition). This book is now out of print and has been replaced by the current edition. This has been fully updated, and Thomas has not contributed to it at all.”
Thank God for that. We can all sleep at night now. Well, except the thousands of people still using the last edition wondering why the ‘table service’ isn’t as good as it was when Thomas wrote about the place. Or why someone keeps knocking at the door of the hotel room asking if they want ‘the Thomas special’. ‘Out of print’ doesn’t mean ‘out of circulation’. I’ve lost count of the bookstores I’ve seen across the world selling ancient editions of titles and travelers using guides a couple of editions old. ‘Fully updated’ also does not necessarily mean every review which Thomas the Sex Engine wrote has been replaced. How about a Brazil 6 amnesty program? Send in your old copy and LP will give you a new edition, untainted by the debauched, drugged-up writing of the only LP author ever to do bad things.
LP: “Thomas has claimed that he was not paid enough to travel to Colombia when he was employed as an author on our Colombia guide. The fact is that Thomas was not employed as an on-the-ground author on that guidebook. This means that he did not write any reviews - of places or establishments - in this book. His contribution was to the introductory chapter covering history, culture, food and drink and environment. Two on-the-ground authors wrote the reviews for the Colombia guide.”
While this is actually true, Lonely Planet had known this book was coming out weeks ago and could have avoided a lot of criticism by saying, ‘we never required Thomas to go to Colombia, we never budgeted for him to go to Colombia. He was contributing background material to a book that didn’t require him to travel and was paid adequately for this work. It’s a rather odd accusation and calls into question the rest of his of claims about his experiences working for Lonely Planet.’ Why didn’t they do this the moment the story appeared? The best defense is offense.
LP: “We are also reviewing Venezuela (5th edition). Thomas did not contribute destination information to this guidebook, but did act in a coordinating role during its production.”
What did that coordinating role entail exactly? Did he seduce one of the writers or get them hooked on drugs? I can see how that mentoring aspect of the role could lead to something more sinister.
LP: “Thomas claims he was not paid enough by Lonely Planet to do the job without shortcuts. While we ask a lot of our authors, we lead the industry in the fees we pay, and are committed to a yearly review of author fees.”
The statement that LP leads the industry in fees is not true. Either LP doesn’t know that or they know it and don’t think anyone will call them on it. I am. We’ve worked for many of the big publishers and while Lonely Planet pays experienced writers reasonably well, they are in no way an ‘industry leader’. Especially considering LP keeps copyright, doesn’t pay royalties, and re-purposes content as they see fit. And while “we ask a lot of our authors” is a little ambiguous, if you’re doing an LP gig in the time-frame they recommend (and pay you for) that translates to 18-hour days, seven days a week if you’re doing your job thoroughly. It’s little wonder that authors like Thomas admit they wilt under the pressure.
Wouldn’t it be better if Lonely Planet asked a lot of their authors, but rewarded them well for their hard work and emotional investment in a book by giving them a sniff of a royalty? While I know there are a couple of writers making a good living from writing for LP, we were never willing to use the methods they did to get ahead. Which is one reason we stopped writing for LP and started writing for other publishers.
Perhaps the best way to make money from working for LP is to be rushed off to South America to fact-check a rogue authors’ claims. I hear that’s paying quite handsomely…
* Terry is my husband and co-author of and contributor to around 25 books for Lonely Planet.
The Thomas Kohnstamm Affair continues
The Lonely Planet author fraud scandal has taken more turns than we did on the switchback riddled roads of Crete on our most recent research trip there. Now referred to as the Thomas Kohnstamm Affair by the Guardian, Gadling and others, the controversy hasn't yet begun to die the death some might have predicted. Google the topic and you'll get some 255+ articles and climbing, including blog posts. And the stories are still coming. While the mainstream media initially resorted to sensationalist headlines and regurgitating content off feeds, with little in the way of analysis, recent coverage is more considered, reflective and opinionated, and often coming from first-hand experience. Others are still resorting to attention-grabbing headlines to pull in readers and in those cases the discussion that follows in the comments is tending to be more insightful (especially from travellers) and the revelations more compelling (from guidebook writers). Those worth a look include Travel publishers slam Lonely Planet (The Bookseller); Which guidebooks can you trust (Times Online); Postcards from the edge of travel writing (The Independent); Why guidebooks have to lie (Sydney Morning Herald blog); The truth about writing Lonely Planet guidebooks (The Guardian); Writer's story rattles Lonely Planet contributors; and Guidebooks: don't believe everything you read (Times Online); and Derelict vs. Duty (The Perrin Post, Concierge). Readers have been asking me to write more about the travel writing process here and although that wasn't my intention in starting this blog, that doesn't seems like such a bad idea now, if just to show that we're not all like Thomas Kohnstamm.
Strange Planet (part 2): fasten your seat belts, it's going to be a bumpy ride
BY TERRY CARTER* Those readers assuming that the form of Jayson Blair journalism practiced by Thomas Kohnstamm (and we can call it ‘journalism’ now that Lonely Planet is part of the BBC, can’t we?) is rife at LP would be wrong from what I know of my ex-colleagues. Those readers wondering if LP’s two hundred or so freelance writers have moral compasses always pointing to ‘ethical behavior’ might have reason to occasionally doubt a glowing hotel review or the vagueness of the write-up of a particularly far-flung dot on a map. They might also be wondering how the commissioning editors know that the writer who they’ve underpaid isn’t accepting the hospitality of a five-star establishment or sitting down to comp’ed meals, or is, in fact, even in the country. And they would be right to wonder.
Most of the time, the editor has never met the writer they’ve commissioned, let alone be able to look for track-marks on their arms and odd twitches while fending off inappropriate sexual advances or being asked for a loan, you know, just to tide them over until the advance payment for the commission goes in their account. But it would be absurd to imagine that late one night on you way home from dinner in a South American town that the guy going ‘psst, want some drugs’ is in fact researching an LP title and just wanting to make some extra cash.
However, I’m still baffled at LP’s editing process on this occasion. This armchair author’s chapter went through and they couldn’t even spot the fact that the writer never set foot in the country? And what about spotting the plagiarism? There’s clearly a need for some checks and balances rather than relying on simple blind faith (in the cult of Lonely Planet) in the people you’re underpaying. This has always troubled us about LP and Lara twice proposed an auditing process to LP; she was never even graced with a response to her suggestion.
But here’s the sting in the tail. Lonely Planet’s Piers Pickard told The Sunday Telegraph that the company’s ‘urgent review’ of Mr Kohnstamm’s guidebooks had failed to find any inaccuracies in them. Perhaps Pickard informed The Sunday Telegraph by email and they failed to notice the
This has me thinking that if a drug-dealing and debauched individual who never even sullied the soil of Colombia can turn in perfect prose on the subject (‘urgent’ review notwithstanding), perhaps LP could just save money on these pesky, needy, unfaithful, freelancers who are always crying poor and simply phone update all the books themselves from Melbourne? That could really save on those fees and author workshops.
Thomas, in the meantime, must be considering other career options (I doubt that the Travel Channel are keen) and the BBC must be wondering what the hell it just bought into. And the follow-up feature stories are going to make for interesting reading as journalists (particularly in Australia where LP is an Aussie icon) are already asking current and ex-authors some fascinating questions. The fasten seatbelt light is on.
* Terry is my husband and co-author of and contributor to around 25 books for Lonely Planet.
Strange Planet (part 1): an unusual tale of a travel writer who didn't have the itch
BY TERRY CARTER* I don’t want to waste too much time on the new book Do Travel Writers Go To Hell? by Thomas Kohnstamm as I haven’t read it and have no interest reading it (the reasons will become obvious in the post), but there’s a couple of things that are apparent. Lonely Planet can still dodge a bullet here (they’re lucky that a travel writer didn’t really set out to destroy their credibility) and Thomas Kohnstamm, perhaps egged on by his publisher is clearly trying to be travel writing’s Anthony Bourdain. But failing.
Having completed over a couple of dozen contracts for LP, it’s no secret to me that Lonely Planet’s fees won’t make you a millionaire. I’m living proof. LP relies heavily on the moral compass of its writers to not cede to the temptations of accepting freebies and cutting corners while on the road. One of the ways that they attempt to keep the compasses pointing to ‘good’ not ‘evil’ is by keeping its team of writers close to its bosom by making them feel involved in the company. I never felt close to LP (never thought I fitted in with their writing ‘style’ either), with their stifling political correctness, holier than thou attitude, and disingenuous ‘LP family’ shtick, but regardless, when you sign a contract, you should honour it.
By claiming that he never even went to one of the countries he was contracted to write about (Colombia) because it didn’t pay enough, Thomas Kohnstamm sets himself apart from every travel writer I know. If LP makes you an offer that isn’t enough, ask for more (explaining how you worked out your budget and daily expenses) or reject it. If it’s a break even job, a newbie writer looking for their first gig will end up gladly accepting the offer, after all, travel writing is the ‘best job in the world’™. Besides, a good writer can make as much money as the contract (Lara and I have generally made much more) by selling feature stories and photographs to magazines off the back of the trip. I don’t know why this is news to Kohnstamm, but the time for figuring out whether you’re going to make any money from a gig is during contract negotiations. And hell, it was COLOMBIA he didn’t go to and given that Kohnstamm admits to dealing drugs, surely an enterprising travel writer such as himself could see the synergy there.
The thing that offends me most about this whole affair is that travel writers do what they do because they love travel – first and foremost. I’m not talking about newspaper journalists who are writing obituaries one day then get rewarded with a three-day freebie at the Burj Al Arab, and return to write the obligatory glowing ‘review’. I’m talking about the writers who get the travel itch when a jet flies overhead. The ones who have a carry-on bag ready to go sitting in the hallway of their apartment or house. The ones who never really unpack. The ones with story ideas that fill notepads or sticky notes on their well-travelled laptops. The ones who have AC adapters for every wall socket known to mankind – and can tell you which country they fit. By feel. In the dark. The ones who never get tired of getting up on the first day in a new city and hitting the streets.
To these writers the thought of accepting a contract and not going to the country is absurd – the journey is the reward, not the barely adequate funds that get you there.
And actually telling people that you didn’t go is even sillier than not going in the first place. And blaming LP for turning you into a drug dealer to make ends meet is simply pathetic. A well-traveled writer would at least know how to paint themselves silver, stand on a milk crate and mime, or do that eternal dreadlock traveller special, juggling fire sticks. Really Thomas, LP was not your baby-sitter. LP didn’t owe you a living.
* Terry is my husband and co-author of and contributor to around 25 books for Lonely Planet
Media reels: Lonely Planet author fraud
Am I outraged? Am I reeling? Am I surprised? No, no and no. But as a travel writer, and a former Lonely Planet guidebook author, it’s impossible for me to keep blogging away about luxury travel on a budget (my next post) and ignore the dozens of headlines in the global media over the last days following pre-publicity for Thomas Kohnstamm's book 'Do Travel Writer's Go To Hell? (Random House, due for release 22/4/08)'. Have you seen these? Confessions of a Travel Writer Rattle Execs at Lonely Planet (The New York Observer, 9/4/08); Journalism on a Shoestring (Outside magazine, April 08); Shocker: Lonely Planet Writers Accept Schwag (Guest of a Guest blog, 10/4/08); and this weekend: Lonely Planet writer says he made up part of books (Reuters); Lonely Planet reeling after author's fraud (www.news.com.au); Travel writer tells newspaper he plagiarized, dealt drugs (on CNN.com); Lonely Planet rocked by claims of free trips, plagiarism (Courier Mail, Australia); Lonely Planet rocked by author fraud (National Nine News/NineMSN); Lonely Planet's Bad Trip (The Daily Telegraph/Sunday Telegraph, Australia); Lonely Planet Rocked By Fraud Scandal (Sydney Morning Herald/The Age); A travel writer on a not so lonely planet (Telegraph, UK); and 5 Reasons to be outraged by the Lonely Planet fraud (Gadling travel blog). There was also a fascinating (for different reasons) discussion on Lonely Planet's online travel community forum Thorn Tree: Lonely Planet Author's Fraud and comments on the Colombia guide. As I haven't read the much-discussed book yet, I can't comment on the content. But like many writers I was initially thrilled to see a fellow author publish what some would consider to be a real book. After all, every travel writer dreams of writing travel lit. (Terry and I are also writing a book about our two years of continuous travel on commissions). But then there was the barrage of headlines and simplistic opinions. Such as the suggestion that one writer's wild behavior and "questionable ethics" imply all travel writers 'research' books this way. And the even more ludicrous claim that this will impact the credibility of travel writing and the integrity of travel writers. Let's face it: every industry has its equivalent of the gonzo journalist. And every industry has its workers who occasionally behave unethically on the job, just as there are organizations that make it easy for workers to abuse the 'system' and managers and staff who prefer to look the other way. Plagiarism? Accepting freebies? None of this is new. While Lonely Planet's policy doesn't allow authors to accept comps or discounts in exchange for positive coverage when on assignment for LP, travel writers from some of the world's most reputable newspapers and magazines frequently travel courtesy of airlines and hotels, and get food, drinks, tours, spas and other activities for free. It doesn't appear to compromise their work. (Or does it? There's a topic for another post.) Some writers are also lazy, writing about places they've never been, and cutting and pasting freely from other stories without acknowledgment; see my previous posts. But the actions of a small percentage shouldn't impact the whole travel writing profession, not publisher nor travel writer.Okay, I admit it, there was one thing that was surprising - apart from the fact that Lonely Planet didn't find any errors in the Colombia guide (or any of Thomas K's other books), so we better make that two - why on earth would Thomas have accepted the Colombia contract and not gone there? The main reason we all work these long hours (12 hour days, 7 days a week, 362 days a year - and I'm not kidding!), for very little pay (that part is true too), is for the love of travel. To get an opportunity to travel and not do so is even more ludicrous than some of claims being made. If you didn't see this article A Job With Travel But No Vacation in 2006, take a read now; note that the story opens with a tale from Thomas' travels.
The image? Note-taking over a lunch break while researching in Ithaki, Greece, two summers ago. Terry is off taking photos of fishermen mending their nets. Now do you see why we do what we do?