More on TechnologyTell: Gadget News | Apple News
Mike Shatzkin: In self-publishing trend, publishing industry reaps what it has sown
August 25, 2010 | 12:15 pm
|
By Chris Meadows
![shatzkin[1]](http://www.teleread.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/shatzkin1.jpg "shatzkin[1]")
A couple of days ago I mentioned Seth Godin’s departure from traditional publishing, and talked about whether “anyone” could do it. Certainly, from recent reports, Joe Konrath has been doing well with self-publishing through Amazon.
Publishing industry consultant Mike Shatzkin has also taken a look at Godin’s announcement, and whether in fact “anyone” can make that same transition, and has some interesting conclusions.
Shatzkin notes that self-publishing does have some significant advantages, for authors who can make it work. Earning a larger percentage of the sale price, for one; the additional flexibility in how to market and reach an audience for another. But he also points out that publishers may actually be reaping what they have sown.
Back in the ‘90s, Shatzkin notes, publishers began asking “what’s the author’s platform” when they took on new books—wanting to know what the author was doing himself to promote that they could perhaps latch onto and build upon in their own promotional efforts.
But with the growth of social media in the ‘00s, authors began to find that they could self-promote even better than the publishers could—and with digital technology, putting manuscripts into publishable form is easier than before, too. So authors are beginning to see fewer benefits to working with established publishers, and more benefits to doing it themselves.
One of my on-line friends remains adamant in his insistence that he will never read a “self-published” book, since there are still more professionally-published books produced every year than he could read in a lifetime. Better to stick with books that have had their quality vetted by someone, he figures, than to take a chance on something any schmuck could slap out on the ‘net. After all, his time is valuable. And I’m sure there are plenty of people out there who feel the same way.
But I wonder when and if that will ever start to change?
|
Related Posts:
Previous
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS
Comments:
Thanks for the post, Shatzin is always pretty on target.
Scott Nicholson
As long as a fraction of the readers discovers and recommends self published titles, there’s only so many times publisher-certified-only readers can say ‘no’ before becoming socially awkward.
Of course they’re reaping what they’ve sown. C-Span II ran part of the recent Book Expo keynote session. During that session they took a few minutes to talk about what advice might be given to both established and new writers regarding the new realities of marketing and promotion. The agent on the panel said she wasn’t looking for new writers. In so many words.
So you’ve got a number of publishers who have passed the slush pile work to agents, and at least some agents who apparently don’t want it either. And they’re surprised when people decide to just do it themselves?
Hope there’s lots of room in the La Brea tar pits because some of these folks are headed there.
Bests to all,
–tr
Personally I find this a topic riddled with assumptions and huge risks.
As regards Chris’ interesting article I am sure that there are thousands of writers out there spending their time mulling over the question. Tempted by the higher earnings and perhaps unhappiness with one element of their experience with agents and publishers or other. I hope they are very cautious because writers don’t strike me as people who have a lot of business nous and yet this is exactly what they are considering doing – going into business for themselves. As someone well familiar with that sector I see so many who focus only on the earnings and overlook the tough yards and costs of the marketing side.
It seems self evident that for many many established writers who have made their name and already built a readership, the transition to self publishing could be made with relative ease. The big job has already been done. One note of serious caution however. Marketing does not last forever. Far from it. They may have a readership base now. They may have a reputation now. But that can fade very very fast if it is not fed continuously and aggressively.
The only missing element is a filtering process on their work. Though imho this should not be ignored. I would look at the parallel with musicians who go it alone after being in successful bands where other members acted as a filter to their uncontrolled creativity. Look how many failed when they went solo and how few succeeded.
For writers who have not established a reputation or readership I advise enormous caution. Instead of just spending their life writing and creating they will have to develop a business mind, find a way to promote themselves against the vast background noise, and filter what they publish. From my (limited) exposure to writers this is a tall order.I suggest that the task of successful promotion is one hell of a lot harder than they think it is.
Long term Chris asks about the future of self publishing and how the public will look at it. I suspect that they will not change their minds from today’s attitude. Readers need someone to recommend books to them and hence filter them.Today they perceive book shops to that through highlighting best sellers and staff choices and publisher’s choices.
In a future of ebooks, where bookshops will diminish in number and size, readers will look even more to prominent reviewers, book clubs, specialist sites that provide recommendations and of course family and friends. Self publishing will remain the high risk, dubious cousin far into the future imho.
Tony talks about the slush pile being pushed away from publishers to agents. I thought this had always been the way. He also mentions that agents don’t want it either. Well maybe that is because they have so many successful writers already on their books and so many books are being published (too many imho).
It will change when book buyers and reviewers lose the attitude that *all* self-published books are subpar. It will change when the media starts to report on what’s going right with self-publishing and not how it’s only redeeming quality is a stepping stone to a contract with a NYC big house. And it will change when self-publishers themselves do it right: professional editing and design, quality printing, and avoiding the online vanity publishers. Some authors in fact do it right, and they are the bright spots on which to focus.
I think publishers need to face facts. It’s already happened to the music industry. With the internet, people can not only publish themselves, but do it cheaper with more profit for themselves.
Once again, we see an industry trying desperately to prop up it’s dying business model, rather than embracing the change and changing with it. Just as Kodak reinvented itself with the popularity of digital cameras, the publisher that chooses to change with the industry will be the last man standing.
The reality is that over 90% of the professionally published works of literature are subpar. That’s why they have this ridiculous agreement over unsold books being returned from stores and why most authors get a pittance for their work since most books are not money makers for the BPH. They follow a shotgun approach and hope the few that strike the heart give lots of money to keep going.
From reading Joe Konrath’s blog, it seems like a number of authors are going to have no choice. He’s hearing from authors who are being dropped by their publishers.
All books still need an editor. But there are hundreds of talented free-lance editors for hire. Self-published works can be of high quality. But there are still a lot of crappy ones out there. The great thing is the consumer can read part of the book and decide for themselves.
I’m happy for your friend whose time is so valuable he can only spend it on predigested blurbs. Everyone is continually confusing quality with quantity, and the industry is mainly concerned with the latter, as it should be, since it is merely a business selling product like any other. All books are stuff some writer threw out there, whether it was ‘filtered’ through someone else’s set of criteria or not. I think your friend is fooling himself if he thinks that only other people are better judges of his tastes than he is.
Sheyna Galyan – Nicely said. Now if the big old fashioned publishers would stop scanning a paper book that they were too dumb to save the digital version, and then not even proofing it, MAYBE some of us readers out here would not be so down on the big houses and excited about an indie that does have the wherewithal to have his book properly edited. I have seen books put out in plain TXT format that are better written and edited than many of the mainstream books.