Despite Warning Signs, Tyndale House Published a Pocket Edition of The Boy Who Came Back from Heaven in 2014

BWCBFHpaperback
Despite being aware that Alex Malarkey called the book about him deceptive and that his mother believed the book to be filled with inaccuracies, Tyndale House published a pocket paperback edition of the book  in March 2014. The publication date is over two years after they became aware that Alex posted his comments about the deceptive nature of the book on a Facebook fan page for the book.
In an April 20, 2012 email I have just obtained, Tyndale House publisher Jan Harris Long told Kevin and Beth Malarkey that the Tyndale team was aware that Alex had called the book “deceptive” in a Facebook posting. Long wrote:

We published The Boy Who Came Back from Heaven in the belief that it was a book your entire family was behind. We specifically asked if Alex was comfortable with doing the book and were told that he was. It was our understanding that Alex thought the book would be his way of fulfilling a calling to be a missionary. Several months ago, however, Alex posted a comment on the web saying that the book was “deceptive,” which was obviously of great  concern to us.

Tyndale’s reps then asked Kevin Malarkey to check with Alex but there is no indication from the email that Malarkey provided any feedback to Tyndale.

Because of Alex’s fragile health situation at the time, Kevin wanted to delay having that conversation with him, but said he would do so at a later time.  So far, however, we haven’t gotten any further information on this.

After indicating that Tyndale wanted a list of specific inaccuracies (which Beth Malarkey later provided), the publisher seemed to suggest that a resolution was required to continue:

This leaves us in a difficult situation. We entered into a book agreement in good faith and published a manuscript that we believed to be accurate. As part of our editorial and documentary development process, we interviewed a number of people who were either involved in the story or were witnesses to it. After being told that there may be inaccuracies in the book, we attempted to get information so that we could either confirm the book’s accuracy or correct any errors, but have been unable to get specifics.
Since we were unable to get any specific information that would enable us to revise the manuscript—and we didn’t want to create or add to tensions in your home—we did not force the issue.  But when one of our colleagues in our media services department told us that Beth had called last week and, among other things, expressed the view that Tyndale was “exploiting” her son, we felt we had no option but to insist that this situation be addressed.
We are requesting a meeting or phone call with the two of you and Matt Jacobson to talk through these issues and to identify next steps. Our goal is to 1) find out what, if any, inaccuracies are in the book so we can correct them and 2) to find a path forward that is glorifying to God.

It is clear that Tyndale wanted to meet with the Malarkeys. It is also clear that the publisher received Malarkey’s list of problems with the book, and that they were aware that Alex considered it deceptive. However, after insisting that the situation be addressed, the publisher did little else to address it. Instead of backing away from the book (as Tyndale has done with Mark Driscoll), they moved ahead. Despite the warning signs, the publisher continued promoting and selling the book and even published the book again in yet another form (the pocket paperback).
Ambassador Speakers
I have recently learned of yet another warning sign that the publisher may or may not have known about. For a brief period after the book was published, Kevin Malarkey was promoted by Ambassador Speakers agency. However, according to the president of Ambassador, Wes Yoder, Malarkey was removed from the roster about three years ago. However, Malarkey’s profile (now available via Google cache) had remained available via Google search. It has now been removed. Yoder told me simply: “We believed Beth was telling us the truth.”
Perhaps Tyndale House did not know that Kevin was removed from this agency. However, it seems like a significant event for a Tyndale best-selling author to keep from the publisher.
 

More Reasons Tyndale House Should Have Investigated Obvious Problems with The Boy Who Came Back from Heaven

(See update at the end of the post)
If you are reading this, there is pretty good chance you know that Tyndale House decided to stop printing The Boy Who Came Back from Heaven. The boy, Alex Malarkey, suffered a horrific car accident when he was six years old but has recently retracted his story about going to and coming back from heaven. The fallout has been an intense media storm.
A good overview of the controversy was published yesterday by the UK Guardian. That paper has some of the communications between Alex Malarkey’s mother and Tyndale House along with Tyndale House’s latest statements on the subject.
A good source for much of the email exchange in 2012 in which Beth Malarkey asked Tyndale to pull the book from print is at Phil Johnson’s blog. At the end of that exchange, Jan Harris Long publisher at Tyndale House said:

Even if we could make a case for breaking our contract, the book could (and probably would) be back in print with another publisher within a few weeks. So I don’t think that would achieve your goal.

In those emails, Beth Malarkey made a pretty good case that Tyndale should investigate the facts in the book and ask Kevin Malarkey and the book agent some hard questions. Mrs. Malarkey also provided the identity of people mentioned in the book and expressed doubts that those people were interviewed for the project. In other words, leads were given that would have allowed Tyndale to investigate claims in the book. After all, when Mark Driscoll was accused of plagiarism, Tyndale launched an investigation of those allegations. Clearly, Beth Malarkey’s allegations were as serious, if not more so, than those leveled against Driscoll. Last night, I asked Tyndale House if the company conducted an investigation. No replies to my questions as yet.
According to the email exchange, the problems with the story go back to the beginning. In one of the emails, Beth Malarkey said Tyndale employees had heard Alex protest about the inclusion of angels and heaven in the story when he was being interviewed for the book. On April 23, 2012, Beth Malarkey wrote:

From: beth malarkey
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 6:46 PM
To: Jan Long Harris
Subject: RE: innaccuracies
Sorry., but I had one more thought….you guys were here. On November 3 & 4, 2009, I had to pull Alex into the room to help him calm down. Some of the team from tyndale were asking him questions about heaven and angels. He made it clear that he did not want a book going in that direction and that he was not supposed to tell. I  tried to ask the team members to please not push him on the matter just because Alex had seen things  and he was a child. It was made clear soon after that that the title choice and cover picture were not going to be decided by Alex anyway. I am guessing that in November the direction of the story was pretty much already determined just not directly stated to Alex. So you see, Alex has spoken directly to team members before…..

Jan Harris Long replied that she was unaware of Alex’s feelings about including heaven and angels. However, if Beth Malarkey is correct, then someone at Tyndale knew the book did not properly reflect the sentiment of the child author. Tyndale had more than enough to go on in 2012 to launch an investigation.
On February 24, 2013, Beth Malarkey again wrote to Jan Harris Long claiming that Alex was being exploited.

From: beth malarkey
Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 5:23 PM
To: Jan Long Harris
Subject: Re: Conference call?is
Dear Jan,
It has been almost a year since my last correspondence with your group. I have learned much and gained much strength as I continue on this journey. I did receive more phone calls after that last email that I exchanged with you, as well as some mail, but i really saw no point in forwarding those things onto your group. I was extremely disappointed that all that seemed to want to be accomplished was some changes to materials to try to improve what was claimed to be(by me)inaccurate. The real issues of what was being done (and is still being done) with my son never really seemed to be a concern. I was told that Kevin is in contract with you, which I am guessing is the reason that he was forwarded all the emails that I sent to you.(He told me that he was sent each page). His threats of not being believed if I spoke up seem to be true.  I was told by you that you can not tell someone how to spend their money. I am ALex Malarkey’s mom and only caregiver but yet I am not allowed to know what legal contracts were signed with my minor, dependent child’s name possibly on them? If he is indeed a coauthor, he would be entitled to at least 50% of the royalties. Have any checks been written to him? He is a medicaid recipient and can not have money so if money has been sent to him, where is it? How can all of this be allowed to go on?? This is not an issue of just truth not being told but something much deeper and yet it being promoted and encouraged. I have sought much counsel on the matter and the one thing that I can do is take care of my kids and tell the truth. This is not something that a child needs to be asked about but adults need to examine very closely for the possible wrongs and then take action. A child is being exploited and that is truth. His name is being used on materials that are selling because people believe they are reading his words, and that he is benefiting financially from the sales of the materials, neither of which is true.

Long wrote back on March 4 to say she was sorry the book was a source of distress. Long indicated that she had taken up some of Malarkey’s questions with the book agent, Matt Jacobson, although she didn’t disclose Jacobson’s answers. She told Malarkey that the reason Kevin Malarkey was getting the royalties is because he entered into the contract with Tyndale House. Long promised to send Alex royalties if Kevin allowed it contractually. Apparently that never happened. I have made efforts to contact Kevin Malarkey with no success.
By this time, Beth Malarkey had made a clear case for exploitation and Tyndale House had grounds to launch an investigation, not only about the facts of the book but the exploitation of the minor child being used to sell the book. It is amazing that this was allowed to go on for as long as it did. Given the information now available, it appears that the ball is again in the court of Tyndale House and their contractual partners. The burden is on them to try to make things right with those they have used and duped.
UPDATE: Yesterday, Tyndale House released a statement to Christianity Today and on their website.
Tyndale said that they put the book on “out-of-print status” and informed retailers that products could be returned. Regarding what the publisher knew and when, Tyndale said:

While it was only this past week that Alex Malarkey retracted his story, leading to Tyndale’s immediate decision to take the book out of print, our editors had tried on multiple occasions to meet with the family to correct any perceived inaccuracies,” stated Tyndale. “On several occasions in 2012, Tyndale reached out to Beth Malarkey to schedule a meeting to respond to a list of alleged inaccuracies in the book. After originally agreeing to a meeting, Mrs. Malarkey sent us an email on May 22, 2012, saying that, out of concern for her son, she no longer wished to meet.

As I demonstrated above, if Beth Malarkey’s allegations are true (and they were not denied by Tyndale at the time), Tyndale’s process from the beginning was flawed. The boy did not want material regarding heaven and angels in the book, and yet claims about heaven and angels make up a large part of the book. Alex Malarkey did not co-write the book and, according to his mother, protested at least some of the content from the beginning. Tyndale has yet to address this claim from Alex’s mother.
Furthermore, as I demonstrate above, the May 22, 2012 email was not the last effort Alex’s mother made to reach out to Tyndale. Again in 2013, she wrote to Jan Harris Long and asked for help to end the exploitation of her son.
Tyndale’s statement ends with the May 22 email as if Malarkey’s decision not to meet on Tyndale’s terms was decisive and sufficient to relieve them of obligation. However, Malarkey did reach out again. Also, in my opinion, Tyndale’s responsibility to investigate the claims made by Malarkey was not relieved by Malarkey’s May 22, 2012 email.  She had already given them sufficient information to prompt an investigation.

Southern Baptists Say Enough to Perry Noble and NewSpring Church

I don’t know the issues but I post this because it will probably be of interest to readers who follow megachurch news.
Baptists’ Message to NewSpring: You’re not one of us
Noble has admitted to using Resultsource (at least he admitted it) but he did not take profits from the book (different than Mars Hill and according to former Turning Point CFO George C. Hale, David Jeremiah).
Perhaps a NewSpringInsida will show up to enlighten us. Or maybe a NewSpring mattc will provide the church view.

Why Did David Jeremiah's Turning Point Give Up Membership in the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability?

When I first heard former Turning Point CFO George Hale’s account of David Jeremiah’s methods of gaining spots on best-seller lists, I checked the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability membership directory to see if David Jeremiah’s ministry, Turning Point, was a member organization. It is not.
I checked because, in 2014, ECFA president Dan Busby took a public stance against the best-seller list manipulation scheme paid for by Mars Hill Church. At the time, he first told Ruth Graham that the scheme was “unethical and deceptive.”
Later, I asked Busby for an expanded statement which he provided and I published at the time. Busby said concerning best-seller manipulation schemes:

It is unethical and deceptive for ECFA-accredited churches (and other organizations) to:
a.   make efforts to mask the method of procuring products authored or developed by an organization’s leader in order to improve product ratings, and/or
b.   procure products authored or developed by an organization’s leader at a higher price than otherwise available for the sake of improving product ratings, even if there is a valid ministry purpose for paying the higher price.

These two elements appear to be true of former CFO Hale’s description of what Turning Point ministry does to elevate David Jeremiah’s books. According to Hale, Turning Point takes donations for the promise of a book in advance of the publication date. In addition to the book, the donor is often promised resources from Turning Point which are provided at the expense of the non-profit organization. The donations are then used to purchase books at retail cost from a variety of locations around the country in order to maximize the “product ratings.” The books have to be purchased at retail price in order to count in the best-seller list calculations. Jeremiah, as author, is able to purchase those books from the publisher at a tremendous volume discount but such purchases don’t “improve product ratings” nor do they generate royalties.
Busby then pointed to an advisory opinion which remains relevant today.

Product Procurement

Overview.  The leaders of many ECFA members author or develop various intellectual properties, including books.  Royalties received by these leaders for intellectual properties owned by the ECFA member should be considered as one of the elements of compensation when the organization’s governing body determines compensation for the leaders.
Additionally, the organization’s governing body should ensure that the organization is not involved in unethical and deceptive practices relating to the procurement of products authored or developed by its leaders.  The appropriate avenues with which to procure products should be reviewed against the backdrop of ECFA’s Standards 1, 4, and 6.
Standard 1 – Biblical truths and practices.  “Every member shall subscribe to a written statement of faith clearly affirming a commitment to the evangelical Christian faith, or shall otherwise demonstrate such commitment and shall operate in accordance with biblical truths and practices.”
In several of his letters, the Apostle Paul stresses the importance of being beyond reproach and behaving in such a way as to avoid even the appearance of wrong-doing. He tells us that we need to be circumspect to those outside the Church. The reason Paul most often gives is that we must not give Satan any opportunity to destroy the reputation of Christ. Arguably, and in an eternal sense, it may be true that the business of ministries and churches is of concern to God and not to others judging from the outside. However, Scripture is also very clear about our need to be open, honest, and above reproach as we wrestle with the issues of life before Christ’s return. As the Apostle Paul said, “For we are taking pains to do what is right, not only in the eyes of the Lord but also in the eyes of men” (2 Corinthians 8:21).
Standard 4 – Use of Resources.  “Every member shall exercise the appropriate management and controls necessary to provide reasonable assurance that all of the member’s operations are carried out and resources are used in a responsible manner and in conformity with applicable laws and regulations, such conformity taking into account biblical mandates.”
The use of resources in a responsible manner includes managing resources in a God-honoring way. An organization that has expended assets in an unwise manner may diminish its own Christian witness.
Standard 6 – Compensation-Setting and Related-party transactions. Every organization shall set compensation of its top leader and address related-party transactions in a manner that demonstrates integrity and propriety in conformity with ECFA’s Policy for Excellence in Compensation-Setting and Related-Party Transactions.”
Analysis. In reviewing these Standards and their related commentaries against certain methods in which products may be procured, the ECFA Board, Standards Committee, and Staff found the following:
A potential conflict of interest arises when an organization’s leader decides the organization will promote or purchase books authored by the leader, with the leader receiving royalties on the books.  This risk of a conflict-of-interest is heightened when, in relation to products authored or developed by leaders of ECFA members, (a) products are purchased at a higher price than is required and/or (2) there is an effort to mask the method of procuring products in order to improve product rating.
ECFA members must avoid an actual conflict-of-interest by utilizing the related-party transaction process outlined in ECFA’s Policy for Excellence in Related-Party Transactions when purchasing products authored by an organization’s leader.
If an organization pays a higher price than required for procuring products authored or developed by leaders of an ECFA member, there must be a valid ministry purpose for paying the higher price.  Otherwise, the excess expenditure of funds is for a non-ministry purpose.
Where an organization attempts to mask the method of procurement from organizations that determine product ratings, ECFA believes such practices are not in accord with biblical truths and practices.
ECFA’s Positions.  It is unethical and deceptive for a member organization to:

  1. make efforts to mask the method of procuring products authored or developed by an organization’s leader in order to improve product ratings, and/or

  2. procure products authored or developed by an organization’s leader at a higher price than otherwise available for the sake of improving product ratings, even if there is a valid ministry purpose for paying the higher price.

Given Busby’s stance, it is not surprising that Turning Point is not now accredited; the Turning Point approach as described by former CFO George Hale runs afoul of this advisory opinion. However, I recently learned that David Jeremiah’s ministry was once accredited by ECFA. According to a 2010 ECFA newsletter (page 8), Turning Point voluntarily resigned membership in the ECFA in 2010. Who was involved in that decision from Turning Point? Presumably, the key decision makers were David Jeremiah as CEO and Sealy Yates, Jeremiah’s literary agent, who chairs the Turning Point board.
An anonymous source with knowledge of situation told me that the resignation was allowed by the ECFA after an investigation into Turning Point’s means of elevating Jeremiah’s books to the best-seller lists. Turning Point’s leadership was offered the opportunity to stay in the ECFA if the book promotion schemes ceased. However, according to the source, Jeremiah declined and was allowed to resign without action from the ECFA.
I continue to get silence from Turning Point to all questions regarding the best-seller list promotions. I wrote ECFA to ask for comment about the narrative disclosed by the anonymous source. I received no answer from Dan Busby. If anything in this article is incorrect, I invite Turning Point and/or the EFCA to let me know.
On one hand, I am encouraged that the ECFA would insist on compliance with their standards. However, it is discouraging that the ECFA would not alert donors that Turning Point – an organization that pulls in nearly $40 million/year — is not following these standards. Such a deal does not help donors and raises again the value of the ECFA for donors.
 
See also Christianity Today’s article on using book buying schemes to game the best seller lists.

Martin Luther King, Jr. Day – 2015

Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech during the March on Washington on August 28, 1963 (turn up the volume).
[youtube]http://youtu.be/smEqnnklfYs[/youtube]
Sadly, civil rights revisionists such as the Institute on the Constitution assert that civil rights laws should not have been passed. Thank God they were passed and as Dr. King said, “we cannot turn back.”