Advanced Search Protips

+3

Milo Yiannopoulos - This section of Simon & Schuster’s rebuttal to Milo’s lawsuit over DANGEROUS. 🤭

PROTIP: Press the ← and → keys to navigate the gallery, 'g' to view the gallery, or 'r' to view a random image.

Jason Pinter @jasonpinter This section of Simon & Schuster's rebuttal to Milo's lawsuit over DANGEROUS E-mail"), summarizing the conversation he had with Plaintiff and his agent the day before in which he outlined his editorial concerns with the manuscript, including seven most critical overarching issues. He explained that these are the seven main issues that must be addressed in the revised manuscript, in addition to the edits and queries throughout." Ivers Aff. Ex. C. In particular, Ivers noted that the Why Establishment Gays Hate Me" chapter "needs a better central thesis than the notion that gay pcople should go back in thc closet" and the feminist chapter needed a "stronger argument against feminism than saying that they are ugly and sexless and have cats." Id Ivers made it clear that Plaintiffs first draft was not acceptable to the publisher: t goes without saying, that in addition to these seven points, given the level of revision being requested, we reserve the right of additional review and discussion of Ivers comments on the draft manuscript were even more detailed in identifying the substantial concerns the publisher had with the manuscript and spelling out what "revisions, changes or supplements" were needs to be a Preamble "On Freedom of Speech and Political Correctness" that would be a "short and serious statement here that sets out why you do what you do, without trolling, without hombast, without name-calling, and without ego." Id at 3. See also, eg, id. at 13 ("avoid gratuitous insults"), 17 (Unclear, unfunny, delete), 20 (This entire paragraph is just repeating Fake News.", 34 (MAJOR POINT. You will have to address the charge of racism clearly and with greater depth, 62 (when you discuss Leslie Jones in this book - AND YOU MUST), 107 ("This section feels phenomenally petty), 132 (This whole section has to go Too much ego"), 198 ("This entire argument is ridiculous", 146 (This entire section is the most poorly thought out section in the book."), 206 (This... doesn't make sense or pass intellectual muster. It's just trolling on an issue that many readers.might take scriously". As Ivers January 14 E-mail and manuscript comments demonstrate, Ivers considered Plaintiff's first draft to be, at best, a superficial work full of incendiary jokes with no coherent or sophisticated analysis of political issues of free speech. Ivers Aff. 11 15-16. Plainly, it was not acceptable to Simon & Schuster for publication. Id required. Ivers Aff. Ex. B. At the outset, he observed that there Under the Agreement, the determination as to whether the manuscript was "editorially acceptable" must be made "within 45 days." Agrm. 3(a) Given the crash schedule, Ivers made that determination and provided the editorial request in writing for revisions and changes within less than two weeks of receipt of the manuscript. 4819.9829.7688.12 3901014000688 11 of 31 INDEX NO. 65 C. NO. 62 RECEIVED NYScEF. 1:

View Gallery Random Image

+ Add a Comment

Comments (0)

There are no comments currently available.

Display Comments

Legal Information: Know Your Meme ® is a trademark of Literally Media Ltd. By using this site, you are agreeing by the site's terms of use and privacy policy and DMCA policy.
© 2007-2024 Literally Media Ltd.