Home « Forum « Author Hangout

Forum: Author Hangout

Order of presentation

Lugh

I'm close to rolling out what might be called "alternate future" about the Trump Presidency. The core vehicle will be the "Wolf News Network", sex-positive and working to unify.

There are a series of chapters involving the show, and flashbacks to discussions leading to its content. I'm still struggling whether to start the story with the first show, or with a flashback setting context. Anyone interested in reviewing the draft, if only for flow, would be very welcome.

There's a little of Lysistrata meets Fox News. I'm not sure I'd call it fan fiction, but I certainly am writing about real people. In the context, it makes perfectly good sense for Tiffany and Melania to wind up in bed. Any special disclaimers?

Given that real things are happening in real time, I'm inclined to make the story short, but to plan on a series/universe -- "Ripped from the headlines" was an observation from Paige Hawthorne.

Dominions Son

@Lugh

Any special disclaimers?


Writing fiction about still living real people with content they might object to has a number of legal risks.

If the real people you are using in your stories find out about the story, there are a number of torts (civil causes of action) that might be brought against you.

Libel is the biggest risk. You would need to talk to an actual lawyer, but as far as I know, there are no disclaimers that would protect you from a lawsuit.

The best defense for such a story in a libel context would be to position it as a parody. However, even an upfront explicit statement that it's a parody may not by itself be legally sufficient.

A lawsuit over a story posted here may be unlikely, because it's unlikely the people you are writing about are unlikely to ever find out about your story.

However, if it does happen, a law suit could cost you a lot of money even if you win.

You should be warned that the Trumps have a reputation for being particularly litigious.

Replies:   Lugh
Lugh

@Dominions Son

I'll do a reasonable disclaimer, but I'm not chilled.

To quote Bill Marriott, "I've been rich and I've been poor. Being rich is better." Well, I'm not rich any more, so there would be nothing to take with litigation.

Crumbly Writer

I'd be more creative with the names, creating an alternative situation, but with different people. Also "Wolf News" just doesn't do anything for me. If you want it to be cutting, how about "Weasel News", or for more subtlety, "Hound News", which insinuates the old dog is past his glory days and is only lolling around the house, waiting to pass on. Either way "Hound" is much less sexy than "Fox" and sounds better than "Wolf". ("Fox News" is supposed to be fast and quick, so you're breaking the initial assumptions).

richardshagrin

@Crumbly Writer

"Hound" is much less sexy than "Fox"


Maybe "Vixen" for more sex appeal?

"Definition of vixen

1 : a female fox
2 : a shrewish, ill-tempered woman
When Arabella called her a treacherous vixen and a heartless, profligate hussy, she spoke out freely, and said that she wasn't going to be abused. —Anthony Trollope
3 informal : a sexually attractive woman
In this spy spoof, our hero, aided by a sexy vixen, … saves the world from a power-mad despot … —Steven Rebello"

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer

@richardshagrin

Maybe "Vixen" for more sex appeal?

I was thinking of your intended (implied) message, rather than "sexy" sexy, or making a bigger impact with your intended audience rather than trying to make something unsexy sexy.

Lugh

For a variety of reasons, I like "vixen".

To elaborate, the on-air personalities address sexuality explicitly. Tiffany observes that she both has a shorter skirt, and better skill as a policy wonk, than anyone also on Fox.

They also have some sexy Scotsmen in kilts, one of whom is gay-identified.

Vlad_Inhaler
Updated:

@Crumbly Writer

Dingo News? Dingo Voice? Something along those lines.

Lugh

Vixen it is.

Spoilers ahead

The general plot, in flashbacks, shows Trump getting more and more unhinged behind the scenes, including violence to several women in his family and staff. They confer, and, led by Tiffany in the family, start wondering about an obligation to the country. Others, selectively, join their conversations.

The Donald, furious about criticism, demands air time, through Hope Hicks, his press secretary. She has been with him a long time and has a reputation for calming him down. In the story, she does so both sexually, and accepting a physical attack.

Nevertheless, when he gets the airtime, his speech starts to slur, and he shows symptoms of severe stroke, falling unconscious on camera. Rushed to George Washington Hospital nearby, he is not expected to survive. The immediate problem is multiple vacancies in the succession: Pence, Tillerson, and Mnuchin all are out. The Congressional leaders, through an interesting loophole of law, choose to keep their offices.

The show actually starts after Trump's death, with a commitment to heal the nation. Can they do it in a short time, along with the new President? Certainly not completely, but the show uses the sexual weapon more strongly than did Fox, and rides the #metoo movement. Lysistrata crosses minds.

I don't intend this first story of the series to be long, simply because the background will change. Right now, it's 6000 words, which is too short, but I don't expect to do more than 8-10 short chapters.

Ross at Play

Lugh, I hope you enjoy yourself, but you know the score for such a story will be awful, no matter how good it is.
My suggestion would be to go ahead but view all scores from either 8-10 or 1-3 as showing you succeeded, and only those in between - no strong reaction either way by readers - as indicating your story isn't working.

Replies:   richardshagrin
richardshagrin

@Ross at Play

your story isn't working

I disagree. The scoring system adjusts raw scores to be closer to 6 than mere arithmetic averaging would put them. A six or a seven or any score below 8 doesn't mean "your story isn't working." There are good stories with scores in the fours and fives. Some of Rache's stories with themes average readers didn't care for turned out with below average scores, but in my opinion they "worked" as well as any story that ever appeared here.

Scores aren't for authors anyway. They help guide readers, along with other data like reviews and author's blogs and the story description and what the various squick guides selected to go with the story say. Downloads may help authors confirm or question their satisfaction with the story and whether it was a good idea to post it here. But the only person who should tell an author his story isn't working (or her story) should be the author. If you are happy your name is on it, it worked.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play
Updated:

@richardshagrin

stories with themes average readers didn't care for turned out with below average scores

That's precisely why I suggested Lugh may need to look at his raw scores.

I expect he'll get a lot of 1-bombs from who readers who disapprove of the political leaning in the content. I think he should be happy with those scores. If readers either love or hate his story he should conclude he has done well, and it's only scores not showing a strong opinion that might make him wonder whether there's something missing in the way the story was written.

Well said with this:

But the only person who should tell an author his story isn't working (or her story) should be the author. If you are happy your name is on it, it worked.

Crumbly Writer

I'd also shy away from using actual names of actual people. If fact, I wouldn't even be clever with the names, like "Dump" or "Frump" instead of "Trump", as that could put you into some significant legal trouble. Instead, I'd create a fictional presidency, but have the administration function similarly to the real administration, just with different (entirely fictional characters). I'd even throw in a few wildcard, non-existent people, just so it doesn't look too obviously like an attack on Trump.

As far as the scores, you're likely to get dumped on from both sides. Trump supporters will likely attack you for 'threatening to kill the President', while liberals are likely to attack you for not attacking specific actions. Thus, as Ross suggests, you'll likely end up with scores at either extreme but not as many in the middle.

Dominions Son

@Crumbly Writer

Thus, as Ross suggests, you'll likely end up with scores at either extreme but not as many in the middle.


That should actually average out to a nice middle of the pack score around 5-6. :)

Ross at Play

@Crumbly Writer

Thus, as Ross suggests, you'll likely end up with scores at either extreme but not as many in the middle.

I expect Lugh will actually be hit by a double-whammy.
My impression is a similar effect, high scores or low scores, often happens with humour that is in any way "out there". Those that don't get or don't like an author's style of humour will tend to drag down the overall score.

Bondi Beach
Updated:

@Lugh


I'm close to rolling out what might be called "alternate future" about the Trump Presidency. The core vehicle will be the "Wolf News Network", sex-positive and working to unify.


Can you make your characters "Not-Trump," "Not-Melania," i.e., different names and the standard disclaimer but with enough description for the reader to guess who you* might* be talking about?

ETA: That might undermine your alternate-history premise, I realize.

I'm up for the Tiffany-Melania scene ...

bb

Back to Top