The Everything Ghost Hunting Book, by Melissa Martin Ellis.
Plagiarism* annoys me.
I was prepared to give this book a 3-star review. It’s good but not great; you can find most of this information online. The convenience of having it all in one reference was the biggest reason to own this book. The author seemed to have added some extra, useful information, as well.
I have to say “seemed” because… I can’t tell. The author lifted at least one entire section from one of my websites, without credit.
Worse, she wrote it with my words in quotation marks, as if she’d interviewed “the student” herself, and she didn’t mention my website (or me) in the book’s bibliography.
(Yes, I didn’t explain that I was the student in the original story. It’s one way I catch plagiarists who use my stories without permission. They make stupid mistakes like Ms. Ellis did.)
Check it for yourself: The section she “borrowed” is on page 148 in the book. My story — the one she copied — is at Colby-Sawyer College ghosts, New London, NH
(Ellis’ book was published in August 2009. You can use the Wayback Machine to find my article from as early as 2001.)
In my opinion, copying text from one of the largest and oldest ghost-related websites is beyond stupid.
Even worse, the book’s author lives just a couple of hours from me. What… she thought I wouldn’t run into her at some local event? (You can count on an unattractive conversation when that happens.)
It also makes me wonder what else the author copied. Frankly, after I found one part of my website in her book, I was so annoyed, I put the book down.
There may be more from my website, and possibly material from others’, as well. (It’s like eating potato chips: People who do this kind of copying usually can’t stop with just one stolen passage.)
So, I’m really disgusted with this book, the integrity of the author, and the publisher’s editorial staff.
I’m still too irked to leave a review at Amazon.com. Feel free to do so, yourself: Everything Ghost Hunting Book (at Amazon.com)
This could have been a good book. The author could have asked to use my story, with just a reference in the bibliography, and I probably would have agreed to it.
Instead, it gets a half-star rating while I decide what to do about this.
—
*I’m disappointed when people use stories from HollowHill.com without crediting me or the website. However, if they fully rephrase the story, add their own experiences, and so on… well, you can’t copyright an idea.
Most researchers start with existing stories and check out those same locations, themselves. There’s nothing wrong with doing that.
However, I’m one of the few ghost investigators who also looks for unreported and under-reported hauntings. My research is often original and unique, which is why I’m respected by other serious paranormal investigators.
The sad thing is, I’m usually happy to give my permission to people who ask if they can reprint my stories or quote them. I just want credit for my research. That’s professional courtesy.
To copy my work and put it into a book... that’s as blatant and unacceptable as it gets.
When people ask why I don’t report as many haunted locations as I once did, plagiarism is one of the leading reasons. When someone else takes credit — or even worse, earns a paycheck — for work that I did, I’m less willing to share my recent research.
Fiona,
I agree with everything you have said. It is one of the things killing us as paranormal writers. Usually Adams is more strict with this. Anyone in the writer field knows you don’t do this, and anyone in the paranormal writing field knows you don’t lift things from Hollow Hill without asking. One of the things these people don’t get it that getting in touch with the original authors, or even the original people who had the experience, is that you get a better picture to offer the new story and a more truthful side to the story. Fiona finds out…
I was asked to write the preface for this book but had to decline because my Picture Yourself Ghost Hunting book had just been released. I’m kind of glad because I was not a fan of the manuscript when I read it and didn’t want to offend. It’s another case of a writer from another field doing a quick study of the paranormal and putting herself forward as an expert. This is fine, but then offer an outsiders perspective. It actually would give you more credibility.
Hi Christopher,
Thanks for the comments.
I’m seeing weaker standards at many formerly-respected publishing houses; it’s making me nervous about submitting my work to one of my publishers.
It’s one thing to write a book that I know will be edited so it makes me sound like a great author. It’s another to wonder if my work will go from semi-polished draft, straight to print. (That happened to me once, without warning, and I was relieved when the book finally sold out its print run so it’s no longer haunting me… no pun intended.) There are times when I write well… and times when I don’t. Having to be research + writer + editor… that’s something I’d rather not have to do, but I think it’s becoming more mandatory for us as writers.
Fact-checking (at the editorial level) seems to have dropped out pretty quickly when the economy started losing ground. I’ve seen that at one publishing house where I used to have to document everything. Now, they take my word for it, rather than double-checking my information.
That’s one problem with the “Everything…” book, and even a cursory check would have revealed its problems. Lifting information from people like you and me — who’ve been professionals in this field since long before it became popular — is beyond foolish.
However, when a publisher contracts with a writer based on budget constraints rather than the writer’s expertise in a field, I think plagiarism is among the many risks they’re taking.
(I’m scrupulous about my work, as I know you are — but the reputation of publishing lines and houses, and how that affects the field in general — that is a problem for all of us.)
I’m glad you reminded me of your book, Picture Yourself Ghost Hunting. I’ve been meaning to rave about it. It’s a really gorgeous book, with high-quality paper (and therefore the images are able to look their best) and a lot of innovative ideas and helpful how-to details that are useful to researchers.
I’m (finally) finishing up my own ghost photos book, so I checked yours to be sure I’m not reinventing the wheel with mine, and I was very impressed with the information you included in your book. It’s a must-read for anyone using a camera to document paranormal activity.
Cheerfully,
Fiona
Pingback: Plagiarism Among Ghost Researchers - Hollow Hill