Colbert slipped out of character to criticize Assange for letting the personally identifiable information of the pilots in the helicopter video.You've repeatedly made that claim. If you're talking about the Assange interview, that is completly ridiculous. COlbert never "slipped out of Character" He said exactly the the things his Character would have said. The difference is, in this case Ironmouth agreed with what he said so to him he was "out of character"
A couple of nights later, A—— had arranged a crayfish party, a traditional occasion at that time of year in Sweden, and I went along to meet up with her. This was the day after the day she later claimed I had raped her. A—— was there at the party and seemed totally happy, laughing and drinking with me and my friends and her friends until late. We were sitting outside the party and she sent a tweet saying she was "with the coolest people in the world".Oh god, he really is a shitty writer. It's a shame that this book is going to be released unfinished and (apparently) without proper editing, because I was looking forward to it. I'd imagined it as something like a cross between Snow Crash and Ecce Homo but it looks like this dream is never going to be realised.
- The publisher has not been given a copy of the manuscript by Andrew O’Hagan or me. Rather, as a courtesy they were shown the “manuscript in progress” by Andrew O’Hagan’s researcher, as an act of generosity, and for viewing purposes only – expressly agreed to by Canongate. Canongate physically took the manuscript, kept it, and did not return it to Mr. O’Hagan or me.There's also an explanation of how Canongate warned him they were printing and gave him five days to get and injunction, but he couldn't get any lawyers to take the case because he had to show he was in a position to pay damages if he failed.
- Contrary to what The Independent reports, I did not pull the plug on the deal, nor was I unwilling to compromise ... [Canongate] is acting on a contract that both parties agreed to terminate, but is, in any event, in breach even of that contract.
- Although I admire Mr. O'Hagan's writing, this draft was a work in progress. It is entirely uncorrected or fact-checked by me. The entire book was to be heavily modified, extended and revised, in particular, to take into account the privacy of the individuals mentioned in the book. I have a close friendship with Andrew O'Hagan and he stands by me.
- The advance was paid direct into my former solicitors' (FSI) bank account wholly without my consent ... The outcome of this dispute is pending, but a favourable finding would release the entire advance, which has not been touched, back to Canongate and Knopf.
There have been countless other twists and turns to this extraordinary story. But the reason we've decided to publish the book – against Julian's will, but with clear forewarning – is this: with no prospect of ever seeing Julian's advance repaid to us, and with little chance of convincing Julian to engage with that first draft, we had only one sensible option – to publish the draft that we felt was so strong and which conformed so closely to the original brief.posted by memebake at 9:31 AM on September 22, 2011
There is a financial imperative, of course. We hope that in publishing the book we will recover some of our losses. But we are also immensely proud of the book itself. It is a compelling portrait of one of the most mercurial figures alive today.
As for that much commented-upon subtitle, The Unauthorised Autobiography, it is definitely a publishing first. And given we're talking about Julian Assange and WikiLeaks there is, of course, a sweet irony to it too.
« Older We've seen some gorgeous images (and some videos) ... | Simply the Worst.... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by jb at 1:22 PM on September 21, 2011 [24 favorites]