Post History
There were multiple proper courses of action. 1) Refuse to let him publish it under your name, and retract permission to use the paragraphs you wrote. You did not write it, it was a first person n...
Answer
#4: Attribution notice removed
by
System
·
2019-12-19T22:13:58Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/49047 License name: CC BY-SA 4.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T13:15:23Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/49047 License name: CC BY-SA 4.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
#2: Initial revision
There were multiple proper courses of action. 1) Refuse to let him publish it under your name, and retract permission to use the paragraphs you wrote. You did not write it, it was a first person narrative and not your words, publishing it under your name could be considered libel, attributing words and thoughts to you that were not your own. 2) Insist on a rewrite of the article by you using some of his suggestions, but putting it in words you can agree with as your own, as the first person narrator. 3) A weak option, but insist on co-authorship with an explanation; "Based on incidents related to [editor] by [you]" I would try (2) then resort to (1) if refused (2). You have to have backbone, even if it causes a rift between you and a publisher or editor or agent. A first person article opens you up to charges of libel against others, and may damage your professional reputation, or cost you future jobs.
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2019-11-23T22:48:11Z (almost 5 years ago)
Original score: 3