My First Podcast Audiogram (and it's about werewolves!)

 Anyone who produces a podcast has (whether they admit it or not) something I call "audiogram envy" - a longing for those cool little video teasers that include a responsive sound wave graphic.

Well... I envy no longer, and that's because my very own first podcast audiogram was just released.

To celebrate the scary season, I'm in the midst of a five-part series of episodes celebrating Halloween. This week on Stephanie Hoover Has That Story, I talk about the origins of the werewolf mythology and the legends of lycanthropy.

Want a sneak peak...? Check out my one-minute audiogram teaser. And if you like the preview, be sure to watch the whole show here.

The 1969 Vietnam Draft Lottery: 90 Minutes that Changed Half a Million Lives

Listen to the Podcast:

Read the Article:

Being born on September 14th isn't of much consequence in today's world. It's just one of the random 365 possible dates of birth in any given year. But… in 1969, this accident of birth was - depending on one's point of view - lucky, worrisome or downright horrifying.

On December 1, 1969, you see, the United States Selective Service System held its first draft lottery for Vietnam. Or, as Richard Nixon called it,  "random selection." As millions of Americans watched on television, the first capsule was drawn from a glass jar. The date inside that capsule: September 14th.

A second lottery was held that same night, but rather than birth dates this one determined surnames. The first letter drawn was "J."

Hundreds of thousands of young American men breathed a sigh of relief. But not Scott Jenkins, born September 14, 1949. For him the drawing was like someone tapping him on the shoulder and saying, "Welcome to the Army, son. You're going to Vietnam."

In America, the draft (or conscription) was first used during the Revolutionary War. It was reinstituted during the Civil War, both World Wars, Korea and, of course, Vietnam. In a nutshell, the purpose of the draft is to correct the deficit left when there are more vacancies in the Armed Services than there are volunteers. The draft has always been a source of conflict, though, particularly during the Civil War when the practice of "substitution" was allowed. Unfortunately, it was an option often exercised by the well-to-do, and the simmering resentment of the practice led to rioting.

In 1968, Richard Milhouse Nixon ran for president on the slogan, "peace with honor." He promised to end the unpopular Vietnam war. Although President Lyndon B. Johnson dropped out of race, in the months leading up to the election he had been working to negotiate a truce. To this day, there is speculation that Nixon covertly interfered and encouraged the North Vietnamese to pull out of the talks so that he, if elected, could end the war.

By the time of Nixon's election, many were suspicious of the Selective Service System. As during the Civil War, it seemed that young men from upper class families were less likely to be drafted. Nixon sought to rectify this injustice by bringing back the "lottery" system of the draft last used in World War II. Its random nature would ensure, Nixon promised, that all young men were equally eligible for conscription. The first such draft lottery was scheduled for December 1, 1969. It was, for families that included young men between the ages of 19 and 26, like some terrifying reality TV show.

The draft "ceremony" started at 8 p.m. and was expected to end at 10. Members of the Selective Service Youth Advisory Board were brought to Washington DC for the event, and it was only when they were paraded before the cameras in groups of eight that they learned their real roles: they would draw the plastic capsules containing the birth dates.

There were 366 capsules in total (the extra to accommodate leap year). They were placed in a glass jar, two feet high and 16" inches in diameter. Hanging behind the table holding the glass jar was a large board displaying the numbers 1 through 366.

At 8 p.m., with very little fanfare, New York Congressman Alexander Pirnie pulled the first capsule. It contained the birth date September 14. That slip of paper was then affixed to the board, beside position number 1. The odds that young men born on this day between the years 1944 and 1950 would - without some form of deferment - be shipped to Vietnam were 100%.

The United States expected a volunteer enrollment of 290,000 for 1970 which left a deficit of nearly 260,000 required military personnel. This meant that, at the very least, men with the first 122 birth dates pulled would be drafted.

Men with the last 122 birth dates picked would likely never see military service.

Those with the 122 birth dates chosen midway through the draft would suffer the chronic uncertainty of never knowing if or when their numbers would be called.

Several of the Selective Service Youth Advisory Board members were angry about their surprise roles in the draft. One, John R. Lyne, flashed a peace sign before reaching into the jar. Another walked up to the capsules, but then turned away - refusing to participate in the lottery.

Families watching at home felt mixed emotions. Some were happy that their sons would join the military. Others were angry and frightened to see their son's birth date listed among the first on the board. Still others felt enormous relief - mixed with the guilt of knowing that another family would soon be saying goodbye to its son, or cousin, or brother.

As it turned out, the drawing ended well before 10 p.m. In the end it took less than 90 minutes to change the lives of nearly half a million young men.

For most Americans, the draft only served to fuel more vehement opposition to the Vietnam war. Still, the fighting continued and during some months as many as 40,000 men were conscripted.

By June of 1972, Nixon was promising that he would end the draft. It was one of the biggest reasons he was re-elected, just five months later.

Shortly after the start of his second term, the Paris Peace Accords resulted in an official cease fire that allowed for the removal of remaining American troops.

Two years later, to no one's surprise, communist North Vietnam successfully conquered South Vietnam creating the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

In the minds of most, 58,318 American lives had been lost for absolutely nothing.

In all, 2,709,918 U.S. military personnel served in the Vietnam conflict. Though exact figures are nearly impossible to ascertain, estimates of total deaths - including allies and enemy combatants - stands at anywhere from 1.3 to 4.2 million.

If you think that the draft is just a relic of history, think again. All young American men, within 30 days of their 18th birthday, must register with the Selective Service System. If authorized by Congress and the President, that glass jar might yet again be hauled out of its storage closet and filled with plastic capsules.

What do you think YOUR number might be…? SH

----------------------------------

For more information on Stephanie's podcast, books and personal appearances, visit this page of her website.

Thanks for the Pod Love

Yesterday I released the 14th episode of my podcast, Stephanie Hoover Has That Story. Each week brings more and more listeners, and I could not be more thrilled or appreciative. 

The decision to create my own podcast was months in the making. Friends, family members and fans who turned out at my personal appearances all urged me to take the leap. But "putting yourself out there" for a two-hour talk is a little different from doing it with a digital audio file that will live on the internet forever. As you can see, though, those fears didn't stop me.

So... here I am, 14 weeks in, and - to be honest - loving every minute of it. And all of you who listen to the podcast each week are the real reason for the success of the show.

If I could, I would visit each one of you to thank you personally. Since that's impossible - and a little "stalker-ish" - you'll have to settle for a blog post group thank you. Trust me, my appreciation couldn't be more heartfelt either way.

Sappy thoughts aside... if you've caught the political fever from this month's two major party conventions, perhaps you're also interested in U.S. political history. It is with that mindset that I produced my episode on the 1934 Kelayres Massacre, one of the bloodiest political chapters in American history. Five men were killed, and 26 men, women and children were injured. Why? Because a nepotistic Republican party boss in a small Pennsylvania mining town realized he was losing power - and he took his frustration out on a group of unarmed Democrat parade marchers.

There are two shocking truths about this case: the first is that very few people knew about this incident before I wrote the book, The Kelayres Massacre: Politics and Murder in Pennsylvania's Anthracite Coal County; and the second is that the political climate of the 1930s is disturbingly similar to ours today. Hopefully, the more people that hear the story, the lesser the chance of such carnage ever happening again.

After you listen to the Kelayres Massacre episode, perhaps you'll listen to my other shows. Recent topics include Rose Mackenberg (Harry Houdini's "right hand woman"), the Pennsylvania Hex Murders and Six Things You Don't Know about the Kennedy Assassination. Visit StephanieHoover.com for all of the links and details.

In the meantime, here is the story of the Kelayres Massacre:

Will Gatsby Still be "Great" When Its Copyright Expires?

The Great Gatsby is and, at least in my view, will likely remain the greatest American novel ever written. And so, I am terrified what will happen to it on January 1, 2021 when its copyright expires. 

I'm even less excited about this news: four days after that copyright expires, a book by Michael Farris Smith will release. It's called Nick and it's a prequel to the great, Great Gatsby.

I'm not sure if this is an supreme act of hubris, or if this author thinks he can actually capture Fitzgerald's essence. I'm already disappointed by the cover, which is simply a slightly altered knockoff of the original. Hopefully the writing will be more imaginative than the book's dust jacket. 

We'll find out in January.

Psychic Detectives: Usually Right - in Hindsight

In the 1970s, the CIA set out to learn just how useful psychics might be in criminal investigations. But, two bogus "psychic detectives" (Peter Hurkos and Greta Alexander) gave the whole field a black eye. 

Read my article on Clouded in Mystery.

Or, listen to my podcast episode here:

The Disappearance of Agatha Christie

In December 1926, the world had but one question: "Where is Agatha Christie?"

Learn the full story behind the beloved mystery writer's eleven-day disappearance in this 9-minute episode:

What Do Luminol and the Sam Sheppard Trial Have in Common? Glad You Asked.

Today, nearly every modern fan of fictional or true crime shows is familiar with Luminol's recognizable blue glow - but during the infamous murder trial of Dr. Sam Sheppard, it was new and sounded to the jury like something from a science fiction novel. 

In this episode of Stephanie Hoover Has That Story, I tell you about the history of Luminol, and its role in what was then called, "The Trial of the Century."

Proudly Introducing My Podcast.. "Stephanie Hoover Has That Story"

I'm so proud to unveil the first episode of my podcast, "Stephanie Hoover Has That Story."

The slogan of the show is, "Whether it's history, crime or legend - Stephanie Hoover Has That Story."

Over the next weeks, I'll be covering a variety of entertaining and interesting stories. On this first episode, I'm talking about the 1920 locked room murder of carouser and card player Joseph Elwell which spawned the creation of fictional detective Philo Vance.

If you're looking for an interesting way to spend the next 13 minutes, give it a listen.

Proud to Be a Guest on the Popular "Most Notorious!" Podcast

There's a reason why Rolling Stone called Erik Rivenes's historical true crime podcast one of the "ten best." Erik actually reads the book and conducts thorough and entertaining interviews.

I now know this first hand. I was fortunate enough to be a guest on the May 24, 2020 episode. We discussed the Kelayres Massacre - a staggeringly bloody political conflict that happened in Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania in 1934. To be able to share my book and knowledge of this incident was a great honor.

Please consider listening to the podcast. You can find it on MostNotorious.com, on Apple Podcasts, and other popular streaming platforms.

As always, let me know what you think.

Pro Research Tip: Internet Archive Search String

If you're a historical non-fiction writer and researcher like me, or simply conducting historical or genealogical research for personal reasons, you've probably discovered Internet Archive (found at Archive.org). What you may NOT know is how to limit your search to a specific time period - such as materials that exist in the public domain. 

I've created a search string that does EXACTLY that and all you have to do is copy/paste it into the Internet Archive search bar (NOT the Wayback Machine bar). Simply replace the three asterisks (***) - leaving the quotation marks as is - with your one-word or multi-word search term. And remember, you can change the dates if a public domain search is not your goal.

COPY/PASTE THIS PUBLIC DOMAIN LIMITED SEARCH STRING:
description:("***") AND date:[1800-01-01 TO 1924-12-31]

Happy searching!

Subscribe to Author Stephanie Hoover

"Fair Use": Four Factors You Need to Understand

"Fair Use" is one of the least understood, most litigated aspects of United States copyright law. In essence, it controls the use of other copyrighted works in your own art, writing, reviews or news reporting. The concept of Fair Use is judge-created and first surfaced in the 19th century. It was not until 1976 that Fair Use was codified by the U.S. Copyright Office.

To help both lawyers and the general public understand how previous cases were adjudicated, the Copyright Office offers a publicly accessible Fair Use Index. While it is in no way intended to replace qualified legal advice, the case summaries included in the index help researchers understand how and when judges have applied the "four-step analysis" to reach their decisions. These four deciding factors are:

1. The purpose and character of the use of copyrighted work. The main question at issue here: does the new work change the function and meaning of the original by connoting a message that was previously non-existent? If so, it may well be Fair Use.
2. The nature of the copyrighted work. Is the work you're borrowing from highly creative? Does it incorporate unique creative choices? If so, based on a review of decisions in the index, it appears more likely that Fair Use does not apply and that defendants will face a verdict of copyright infringement.
3. Amount and substantiality of the portion used. This one is self-explanatory. The more of the creator's original work you use, the harder it may be to win a Fair Use argument.
4. Future market harm. Does use of the original creation negatively impact its potential future sales and marketability? If so, it seems likely that the defendant's use will be deemed improper and damaging.

The succinct synopses of decided cases in the Fair Use Index typically run one page in length and can be downloaded as PDFs. They are not only interesting reading (plaintiffs include Dr. Seuss Enterprises and Fox News Network), these summaries also provide keen insight into the many ways defendants have run afoul of U.S. copyright laws.

I Studied My 2019 Social Media Activity - Here's the Result

We all spend far too much time on social media - but what does it really do for us as writers? Well... when you can answer that question, let me know. What I do know (for the first time in all the years I've been using social media) is which 2019 posts actually spurred interaction.

Getting Personal

I was gobsmacked to learn that the largest percentage of reactions to my posts (a whopping 58%) resulted from the sharing of personal stories. Photos of myself (or me with family members), posts about childhood experiences, updates about my struggles and successes - those are the items that registered the most with my followers and by a long shot. These updates garnered 28% more responses than the next largest category of post.

I'm not, by nature, much of a self-marketer so it never crossed my mind that folks would want to know the "real Stephanie." Turns out I was wrong - and what a relief that is. Trying to be an "influencer" is way outside of my natural habitat. Glad to know I can just be me, and folks dig it.

Just Write - Don't Talk about It

A fairly substantial 30% of social media interactions came as a result of posts about writing or publishing. Good news because I really like sharing industry updates and thoughts about the writing process. Still, when you're a writer, most people who follow you already know it. Reminding the audience of this fact is both pompous and unnecessary. Most importantly, it's not information your general readership will slow their scroll for.

Save the Political Analysis

I try to be very, very sparse in my political posts because, quite frankly, it's a "no win" topic. And clearly, at 5% of my interactions, that's an accurate assessment on my part. In 2020, my goal is to politic even less.

It's Not News if No One Cares

Occasionally, I see a news story that I find fascinating. My assumption that others might share this enthusiasm is obviously misguided. At just a 4% interaction rate, my news stories fell on deaf ears in 2019. I'll probably still post stories about lost puppies and haunted grocery stories in 2020 - I just won't expect anyone to respond.

Ditch the Sales Pitch

The least surprising finding from my 2019 social media analysis is this one: save the sales pitch because 97% of your online community will ignore it. Which is okay, because promotion of my own books is my least posted kind of message. I'll certainly let followers know when a book is releasing, and I'll still post the occasional book giveaway. Other than that, I'll stick with the posts that share a little bit about who I am as a person. My statistics prove that's what my social media community really wants to read about.

2020 is Coming - Is Your Website Ready?

If you have an author website, now is the time to make those 2020 updates. Here are a few tips based on website housekeeping I just completed:

     • update your copyright notice at the bottom of each page to include the new year
     • check your "about" page - add any new bylines, titles, projects or accomplishments from 2019
     • update your social media links (that may mean replacing links to platforms you don't really use or get traction on with others that are more popular)
     • freshen those pics (and if you haven't taken a new headshot in more than five years, you may want to make that a 2020 priority)
     • if you do presentations, add a calendar to your site that not only promotes these appearances, but let's folks know when you're available
     • remember to offer "value added" content like interesting data from your book research that others might find useful

Hope these tips are helpful and here's to a happy, healthy holiday season and coming new year.

Are You Preaching to the Choir?

Other than the fact that acquisitions editors ask about them, I'm not completely sure how beneficial my social media accounts are. Certainly, there are those core supporters who do enjoy and respond to updates about my writing process or recent, special news. (I'm always grateful to get a thumbs up from those folks.) And, these public platforms are a great way to acknowledge people and organizations I've encountered in the course of research, or for whom I've given presentations. But, overall, for mid-level authors like myself, the ROI on social media probably lags behind the cost of my labor. Then again, I'm a bit conservative in my usage. It is about authors for whom this is not true that I write this post.

   Let me be clear: I have no beef against self-promotion. As goes the old cliche, if you don't believe in yourself no one else will either. There are, however, some logical guidelines I believe authors should follow regarding social media interaction. First and foremost among these is "Don't preach to the choir."

   How many times has this happened to you? You get a connection request from a fellow writer. A quick preview of his social media account demonstrates his enthusiastic marketing approach, but you don't want to be rude, so you accept the link. Sure enough, your instinct is correct. Seemingly simultaneously with clicking "approve," you receive the following message: "Hi and thanks for connecting. Here are the links to my Amazon Author page and my YouTube channel. And, here are links to my four most recent books. Please tell all of your friends and relatives about them, and let me know what you think of my writing!"

   I must be honest. None of that is going to happen. 

   Surely you must have known that I'm a working author when you contacted me. Consequently, you must realize that I'm very likely busy with my own writing and/or book promotion. So, even if I had the interest, where in the world would I find the time to read your complete oeuvre AND promote it to my relatives and acquaintances?

   Why authors persist in promoting their books to other writers is a mystery to me. Wouldn't your time be better spent creating relationships with agents, or publishers, or publicists? What is a fellow writer able to do for you? None of the things those professionals can, that's for sure.
   Lest you assume I'm heartless, please don't confuse my limited availability with a lack of empathy or interest in helping new authors. I (eventually) answer 99% of all emails, many from aspiring writers and researchers looking for career tips and advice. (The 1% I don't answer are from senders who expect me to do work a simple Google search would accomplish.) I have enjoyed selfless help from others and I try to pay those favors forward. But I can't read your books and I won't help you sell them. That's not a favor - that's an expectation of free labor based on the erroneous assumption that I've got all the time in the world to provide it.
   So, here is my advice. Stop preaching to the choir. Fellow writers are all too familiar with the struggles of the book world. The chances of them helping you reach the best seller list are as good as my chances of winning a Dolly Parton look-alike contest. Instead of hard selling your latest release, how about - when you contact writing colleagues via social media - you simply introduce yourself and express your hope for future interactions. Few of us remember uninvited sales pitches, but most appreciate a friendly greeting or kind word with no strings attached. I know I do.

The Video That Ate the Author's Stage Freight

No, this post isn't about a B-rated horror movie. It's my strategy for keeping my cool in front of audiences.

I used to have absolutely zero stage freight. None. Didn't even cross my mind. In high school, I was in plays, emceed pep rallies, and led (highly unwelcome) student protests about everything from the lack of ice cream as a lunch option, to the double-standard athletes enjoyed as it related to a preposterously lenient bell curve.

In my late teens and early twenties, I sang in bands, worked in radio (as a production talent) and, as marketing director for the regional transit authority, gave countless talks on the benefits of riding the bus.

It was not until several decades later that I, inexplicably, developed extreme anxiety about any kind of public activity. Talk about bad timing. Just when publishers started buying my books, I was too terrified to go out and market them.

Fortunately for me, things have now swung back the other way. I'm in front of audiences again, doing radio and TV appearances, and greatly enjoying interacting with readers and fans. Part of this healing process was a natural by-product of aging and growing comfortable in my own skin. But another equally important part, one that you can use as your own secret weapon, is my use of short videos during my presentations.

This is the title page of my most recent video. It serves as a companion piece during talks and book signings for my latest release, Spiritualism and the Supernatural: An Entertaining Encyclopedia for Believers and Skeptics Alike.

Now, I can hear many of you pointing out, in rather terse and aggressive tones, the fact that you don't have the slightest bit of experience with video production. Well, neither did I. But I can read instructions, FAQs and help files - and so can you. You may not rival Francis Ford Coppola first time out, and that's okay. You just need to be you.

If you use a slightly older Windows computer, you already have Movie Maker. If you have a newer computer that doesn't feature this program, there are other free video making software packages, one of which is VSDC free video editor. (And, no, I'm not making money on that recommendation.)

Your videos can be as complex or simple as you like. Maybe just still pics with voice overs, for instance. Or, maybe you (like me) choose to film yourself delivering anecdotes or demonstrations. Maybe you just prefer background music and no voice over at all. Do it.

The point, of course, is to give yourself a diversion at the same time you're offering your audience added value. "Look at me," you'll be crowing silently to yourself. "Not only am I speaking to you - I'm showing a short film, too!"

The best thing about videos is that you can choose when and how to present them. If you're nervous the moment you hit the stage, thank the audience for turning out, and hit "play." Let the video introduce you and your topic. Then hit "pause" and deliver prepared remarks. Take some questions. Embellish what your video has summarized. Whatever pacing or approach you choose, let the video alleviate some of the pressure of public speaking.

Let's face it: folks wouldn't turn out if they weren't interested in you or your book. They're not going to insult or embarrass you. They're rooting for you to do well. While I can't give you a hard and fast rule, for me it takes about five minutes to achieve complete ease at the podium. By then, I can see the audience enjoying the video and my interjected live comments. Once I feel that wave of welcome, the rest of the event is pretty much smooth sailing.

Will the first video you make be the one you show at your book signing? Probably not. It takes a little while to get things the way you want them. On the other hand, your audience isn't expecting mind-blowing special effects, either. Go easy on yourself. Include a few interesting details not in the book. Tell a few personal stories you've not shared before. Open up with some unique details about how you went about researching and writing the story. In short, capture YOURSELF on film, in whatever way best illustrates the kind of author that you are. This isn't just for the audience's benefit - it's for yours. You're making a video you can use time and time again. That makes your next appearance even less stressful than the first.

The best person to sell your book is you, though that doesn't make public speaking any easier. An entertaining video relieves some of that anxiety. That eight-minute film may never fully eliminate stage freight, but it can certainly keep it at bay until your confidence kicks in. And trust me: it will. So take a deep breath, relax, start filming, and get ready for your close-up.

Don't Ask People Who Love You to Proofread Your Work

It seems natural. You write a few pages, or chapters, or a whole book, and you want a second opinion. So you hand your newborn literary baby to the person closest to you and ask him or her for feedback.

I mean, they're right there, right? So why not use family, friends and neighbors as sounding boards?

I'll tell you why. Unless they're the worst family, friends and neighbors in the world, they really want to like your book. Because they like you. And, perhaps more importantly, they want you to still like them when they're done reading your manuscript.

Aside from the unfair pressure this involuntary editing role creates, consider this more pertinent drawback: what you write might not at all be what these kindhearted folks enjoy reading. In the case of non-fiction, the topic may be incredibly boring to them. Or offensive. Or ridiculously unimportant. It could be a book they would never, ever choose to read, were it not for you thrusting the manuscript in their hands. So how in the world can they be expected to critique it?

But let's say you've already given the book to a work friend and he's finished reading it. Now what? Are you expecting sentence-by-sentence analysis? Objective criticism of plot transitions? A conversational deep dive into how your approach to Victorian vampire romance differs from the supernatural shenanigans of other early 20th century cultures? (Clearly that last one will NEVER happen, and if it does, you must tell me where you work and what else this friend does in his spare time.) The point is - and I'd be willing to bet on this - the response you receive will be one of the following: 1) I really liked it; 2) I wouldn't change a thing; or, 3) You're a really good writer. None of these are necessarily true, they're just an expedient way for your indentured reader to end the ordeal.

Even more disappointing, none of these responses give you what you're craving. What you really want is someone to tell you how to make your book better. No one who loves you will tear out your heart - or tear up your pages - and demand that you start all over again. And THAT'S who you need as your proofreader.

Want to hear how great you look since losing 20 pounds? Your husband's the guy to ask.

Want to know if two flashbacks and a flash forward are too much for one chapter? Ask a literary professional whose job it is to give you an honest answer.

Unless that literary professional is your spouse. If so, hire someone else.

How's This for Offensive: Take Your "Morals Clause" and Shove It

The Authors Guild reports an increase in publishers' demands for a "morals clause" in writers' contracts. Vague terms for our punishable sins include "publicly condemned behavior."

Let's be honest: under the back-breaking yoke of the "influencer" era, every time you write a Facebook post in opposition to the majority of your followers, you will be "publicly condemned."

So... should you have to repay your royalties because a friend-of-a-friend's cousin-in-law finds your position on hemp farming "offensive?"

Should you be forced to return your advance if your comments in support of a family member someone simply dislikes create a Twitter backlash?

Should you lose your book contract if your old college roomie posts a picture of you sleeping with both arms wrapped around your beer bong?

In my view, this trend toward "morals clauses" is one more way that writers - or, as I like to call us, the income generator that finances the publishers' yachts - are trivialized.

It's not bad enough that the vast majority of publishers do NOTHING to assist with the marketing of our books. That they apparently regard the words "book launch party" as vestiges of a dead language. That their business model seems to be "quantity over quality," resulting in a stable of writers so large that providing sales and promotional support is impossible. That their royalty statements are written with the sole purpose of confusing the author.

Nope. All that's just not enough. Now they want to base our (dwindling) income on our level of "morality."

That, my friends, is TRULY worthy of "public condemnation."

Book Launch: Mechanicsburg Mystery Bookshop, April 24, 2019

I am thrilled to announce that the launch for my latest book, Spiritualism and the Supernatural: An Entertaining Encyclopedia for Believers and Skeptics Alike, happens April 24th at the Mechanicsburg Mystery Bookshop.

I'll be giving a presentation about the tricks used by 19th century mediums and - of course! - signing copies of the book.

For details on the event, visit Mechanicsburg Mystery Bookshop's website.

For information on the book, visit StephanieHoover.com.

Thanks, Mr. Publisher - but No Thanks

So... the acquisitions editor of a traditional publishing house I will not mention has been contacting me over the last several weeks, encouraging me to submit a book proposal. 

I was sort of flattered - UNTIL I learned that they use a PREVIOUS traditional publisher I worked with to market their books. 

You know... the publisher that "forgot" to ship the books for the launch party of my third book for them...? The launch party attended by nearly 50 people including state and local politicians, local historians, and lots of really nice readers - some of whom were related to people in the book...? The launch party where I had to announce that there were going to be NO BOOKS - even though it was a book launch and signing...? 

Do I even have to tell you that I sent a polite "Thanks but no thanks" to this editor?

Latest Authors Guild Survey Bad News for Writers

The latest Authors Guild survey results are in - and they are devastating. 

Income for writers across the board is down 42% since 2009. 

Those of you who self-publish are in even worse shape, with earnings of 58% less than traditionally published authors.

Why these declines...? Smaller royalties, Amazon and Google using "fair use" as justification to freely distribute many writers' works, and Amazon's lock on ebook prices, among other reasons. 

If you're NOT a member of the Guild, what are you waiting for...? We can only make changes by working as a strong, united front. 

Or perhaps you disagree with these findings. If so, I'd love to hear your thoughts.