Self-Publishing Flooding – Publishing Industry’s Greatest Challenge

I recently posted an article at Angie's Diaries on a concept called The Grand Illusion. This entails the theory that self publishers, as a collective, reinforce each others' delusion that they have what it takes to produce quality work, when in fact only a small percentage are able to. While not a surprise, there was a discussion following this article that included folk who immediately interpreted my comments as being derogatory on ALL self publishers, or those specific individuals, despite disclaimers and careful multiple instances of wording to totally avoid absolute statements – just on that phenomenon, I rest my case regarding The Grand Illusion.

While contributing to post-article discussions, I stumbled on a fascinating article by David Vinjamuri (contributor to Forbes Magazine) that attempted to provide an even-handed approach to the state of the publishing industry – and didn't do a too bad job of it, although by its very nature, left out some important elements, like the small and middle sized publishing houses. He pointed out some pertinent points about the weaknesses of the large publishing houses' reaction to self-publishing and other technological and business innovations, as well as the effects of self-publishing 'flooding'. The latter analysis, with predictions, rang true with me, and consequently I would like to spend the rest of this blog post on the topic.

A major problem facing publishing in general at this time is the flooding of self-published books – and more pertinently, where the majority of 'quality' ranges from utter shit to underwhelming. Most good self-publishers will agree, but few would admit it because they don't want to be tainted with the stigma, and on top of this, many are caught in The Grand Illusion. This flooding hurts everyone. Readers become frustrated by having to wade through, and in most cases purchase, volumes of substandard work. While the flooding has an effect on the bottom line of large traditional publishers, smaller publishers are more affected, as their material often are in direct competition with self-published work. Finally, the good to excellent self-publishers get washed into oblivion in many cases, due to the sheer weight of self-published titles.

Vinjamuri made a few insightful comments on flooding. The one that resonated with me the most is comparing the written word publishing industry with music. It is an apt simile: in the music industry, for years, people have been able to record their own music, play it in the streets and uTube etc, and sell, without the benefit of the support of a music company. Musicians who are good, rise to the ocassion, and eventually get noticed. They move from the base strata into the higher echelons. Musical contests, such as American Idol and a vast array of others, all allow the best to move into professionalism. More pertinently, consumers have a mechanism to separate the obviously bad from the good, to feel like they have a fighting chance to purchase music that they will like. On a similar level, Vinjamuri used the example of Rotten Tomatoes, a site that compiles prominent critic reviews of films, that provides filmgoers with confidence with regard to what to see. Vinjamuri's major thesis is that written word publishing hasn't got mechanisms in place to stratify titles by quality like the music and film industries – to enable readers to make informed decisions. There is no Rotten Tomatoes for them.

Amazon, among others, opened the flood gates to make money from self-publishers, knowing that flooding would occur; knowing that readers would get inundated. Essentially, they have chosen to become mega-Vanity Publishers and make mega-bucks doing so. As I stated above, good writers from all sectors of the industry, including self-publishing, are seriously disadvantaged by this.

So where to from here? As I stated in my Angie's Diary article, I believe readers will eventually reshape the industry. They will want mechanisms in place to make informed decisions, and before you know it, stratification will occur. The publishers will have to adjust again, but they are well placed to slide in because, after all, they have the lion's share of personnel, technologies and connections to have their work placed in the higher echelons. And so they should. What I dearly hope is that the good writers who are currently self-publishing will be more easily recognized and be allowed, again appropriately, to rise up the ladder.
.
.

The Psychology Of Self-Publishing – A Sad Letter to Self Publishers

There is no easy way to put this. I say this because I believe I am in a good position to make this observation – most of you self publishers should consider giving up. Point Blank. And the reason why is because you don't have the talent and/or intestinal fortitude to attain the desired level of being a professional writer. As an exception, I leave out those self-publishers who don't care – they just want a dozen or so copies to be sold and are self-satisfied with that, and those precious few who actually have the skills and talent.

I am not being cruel. I am being objective and I am being ultimately kind. I also say this knowing full well that for those precious few of you who in fact have what it takes, will often be undiscovered or have to go to hell and back to finally get recognition. That's life, and it's full of unjust shit.

Recognition. This is the concept, above all, that has the highest importance in this discussion.

The people who recognize self publishers the most are other self-publishers. I don't know the figures, but I believe there's over two-hundred thousand of you buggers. Many of you are bitter, vocal, even articulate – and can't write for nuts. Not that you would admit it, nor, for that matter, even KNOW it.

You see, you have a collective – an amorphous, Internet-based super-group made up of thousands of blogs, FB networks, Twitter networks and the like. And collectively, you ASSUME that your members are fair to great writers, and that the publishers, and multinational publishing and distributing companies are all the enemy, and certainly the fault of why each individual among the hundreds of thousands of you, have failed to get the agent, the publishing contract, the Times Best Seller. What makes it worse is that you grasp for any piece of evidence that (correlated or not, contextually correct or not) substantiates your claims/beliefs. Konrath is one such source, and grows his readership and dollars by taking on an unofficial thought-leader role in this mess. I like Konrath, I like what he writes, but I have a poor opinion of how his views just reinforce (intentionally or not) the ignorant self-publishing masses (most of you). This psychological effect has also spawned a totally new industry of companies, consultants and bloggists who make money encouraging you. SHEESH, that is where the rottenness of the industry really exists.

Some of you get a few sales, often by serendipity, and with the help of Amazon's zero-cost schemes – good for Amazon, could possibly get a toe-up for you, but for the majority it just adds to the deep illusion that you have what it takes to be professional writers. Then, as part of this psychology, if you get a bad review by an unbiased reviewer, then it's because the reviewer is a predator (presumably from the same gene pool as the evil publishers, editors, agents). The truth is much more simple – there are good, professional reviewers, editors, agents and publishers out there, who don't just want to make a living, but also want to gain recognition from those who count (readers generally, the genre-industry groups, etc) and want their authors to be recognized. Agents and publishers WANT good authors, because it makes them money, and many of them get a kick out of it. Yes, there are also predators out there, but don't stop people from swimming in the ocean because a shark might swim by.

Recognition. That's the key. A very small number of self-published writers have made it big, and ALMOST ALL of this select group ended up joining traditional publishing groups. That's because they got RECOGNITION by people who really know what they are talking about and have done it collectively, professionally, for millions of years.

Most importantly, you need to get an unbiased view of your work – this is mainly found along the traditional path. Most of you, instead, just by-pass this critical learning/experience curve and find yourselves in a big bubble where all you get is the praise, the 5-star reviews, the interviews etc, from the rest of you.

Sorry, I just had to spell it out. If you are a self-publisher, that's okay. But don't succumb to the psychology of the collective. Keep writing, join good critic groups, write short fiction and SELL them to recognized periodicals, ezines, anthologies etc. Keep looking for good people in the industry who will recognize your talent and skills, if you have it, and help you climb the ladder and gain the recognition you deserve – if you deserve it.

Get real.
.
.

ebook spam

This link eloquently (and succinctly) adds to my discussion on how self publishing waters down genuine authors (don’t get me wrong, there are good things too – it’s just this is a tangible side effect). Thanks to Jay Lake for picking this up in his Link Salad,

languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/
.
.
.

Watershed Day

For months I have been wondering if running the self publishing wing of IFWG is worth it. Randy questioned it today and we agreed to cease it.

This is goodness of immense proportions.

As you may have read in earlier posts, and in other forums, we chose a ‘hybrid’ model of publishing that basically meant we published traditionally as well as self-publish-assisted, but on the proviso that the quality had to be of a certain standard, and we would provide strong support/assistance post publication. We still believe in it, but unfortunately this sent confusing signals to the writing public, and it can’t compete with self-publishing companies that simply publish any shit for a price.

For me, the dilemma was in the area of editing/proofing. If a book did make the grade, it nevertheless had to be edited and proofed, and the model basically said that the author had to pay for those two elements as well. This just doesn’t feature in the minds of writers – the result is stalemate with regard to publishing.

Our move to pure traditional publishing fixes this. Completely; and this is why it is goodness.

We have a long road ahead of us, but it is minus the dilemmas.

A Simplified Analytical Model Describing the Differences Between Traditional and Self-Publishing

This is a copy of a blog post I placed today in the IFWG Publishing site.

I have been involved in many discussions of late, on the differences between Self Publishing using (Print On Demand technology) and traditional publishing, and I have read so many commentaries on the topic on the Internet, that my own views have solidified somewhat, and I feel an urge to discuss them.

I also want to dispel some myths.

I don’t want to dwell on self-publishing efforts by authors who do much of the logistics by themselves, but I believe that this analysis does largely cover the same challenges and opportunities as companies that provide self-publishing services.

A good focus point for this discussion is to try to think of publishing, for an author, as a simplified linear equation:

Title Success refers to the end goal – to have a title that sells well and contributes to the success of an author;

Quality of Title is self-evident – the better the creative work, the better chance it will sell well. This is not a given though, as it is my belief that many excellent titles just take too long to be recognised, if at all.

Quality of Publisher. This factor represents several elements – it refers to the publisher’s requirements to ensure polish of text, printing, cover art, etc. There needs to be an expectation in the industry that a given publisher delivers.

Publisher Marketing Effort. This refers to the extent to which the publisher will support marketing the title to the industry and reading public.

Author Marketing Effort. This refers to the extent to which the author makes an individual effort in marketing the title, both in terms of assisting the publisher, as well as pure individual effort.

There are other influences, but they collectively cannot match any of the factors represented above. Luck is one, and there is little point in discussing it. The best example is the alignment of some titles, and their coincidental exposure, with a world fad – the Dan Browns, the Harry Potters. If it happens, then it happens. Winning lottery happens too.

Each of these factors that collectively contributes to Title Success behaves differently between traditional and POD publisher effort. The following table discusses them:

Success Factor	Traditional Publishing	Self Publishing
Quality of Title	Publishers are generally conservative & will only publish titles from “tried and true” authors and celebrities. It is notoriously difficult for new authors to get a notable publisher to publish them. While dependent on the publisher, titles are generally of high quality, in line with the conservative model.	Most publishers have no interest at all in the quality of the title. They will publish anything the author wants, as long as it is paid for. Authors are in the difficult situation of having to judge the quality of their own work, and unfortunately most of them are seriously biased due to lack of professional help or experience.
Quality of Publisher	Leading publishing houses have professionals who will polish titles to an excellent standard, and provide artwork, including covers, of high grade. There are also notable exceptions to this, depending on the maturity of a given company, as well as their target readers.	Publishers vary in quality, and many should not be in business. Because most work on an authors-pay basis, they have little, if any, interest in polish. There are countless examples of titles that are self-published with appalling typeset, grammar, spelling errors, and artwork.
Publisher Marketing Effort	Publishers tend to spend minimally on new titles, and rely on their sample effort to determine if further spending is required. Often, this initial effort does little to further the title’s progress. The author is stuck with the publisher’s effort because the title is under complete control of the publisher.	Publishers will only market if they are paid to do so, in most cases. Even then, it is relatively minor and they tend not to have the market penetration of traditional publishers. In most cases, however, the title is not bound to the self-publishing effort – the author still has control.
Author Marketing Effort	Good publishers will work with the author, but at a minimal level. There is an expectation that the author will work hard to market the title and it is in fact in the author’s interest to do this, as it may assist in getting the sales needed to attract publisher interest to continue with it.	Publishing companies will make it clear to the author that marketing is generally up to them, and that success will be determined by that effort. This locks the author into a great deal of time commitment, and perhaps money. This does not bode well for authors who have little aptitude for this discipline.

<!–
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:””;
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;}
@page Section1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt;
mso-header-margin:36.0pt;
mso-footer-margin:36.0pt;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:886406446;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-96404388 201916431 201916441 201916443 201916431 201916441 201916443 201916431 201916441 201916443;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
–>

As you can see in the table above, most categories, be they traditional or using the self-publishing paradigm, have negative features. Few have positive. The industry is geared toward business, not the author. This is obscene, and it has been like this from the very start.

However, I think the industry is changing – mainly due to technological innovation, where some of the negative factors are being undermined, re-evaluated, if you will. For example, self-publishing started off as vanity presses, where the author would have to cough up a great deal of money in order for print-runs and binding to take place. This was the only way printing could take place back then. These businesses worked with models where only a small number of customers were needed. Then came the Internet, digital printing, just-in-time printing technologies. Suddenly it was a lot cheaper and faster to publish a book with high grade printing, paper and binding. This is goodness. This phenomenon, along with others, doesn’t per se improve the authors’ lot, but it enabled the industry to be flexible enough to allow for the possibility of better deals for authors.

From the perspective of traditional publishing, there is a proliferation of new small publishers who genuinely want to publish new titles from new authors and are willing to find them. They work hard and don’t necessarily make a lot of money, but they are able to publish, because it is cheaper to do so. I respect these companies to no end. My own company, IFWG Publishing, intends to go down that road with a new imprint within a year.

With completely different dynamics, there is a small subset of the POD/self-publishing industry that is also looking to provide a better deal for authors. I call it hybrid publishing. This is where the publisher chooses to make policy decisions that provide a stronger emphasis on authors’ interests. In the case of my company, IFWG Publishing, this entails:

Not accepting just any title for publishing. It has to have a minimum standard. The philosophy is really very simple: authors can only grow if they can lift their standard to a publishable level; and our company will have better market penetration for titles if all the titles have a reputation of quality. Symbiosis.
Minimum marketing. Our company must provide a reasonable level of marketing support, even if it only entails good working relationships with authors and the provision of good advice. We can and do more than that.
Decent pricing. We simply believe that if we have highly competitive pricing, then we will attract more authors, and more authors will be able to afford to publish their work.
The company authors are authors themselves. We want to help authors grow and we know their motivations. This adds support to the growth of author careers.

I really don’t know where the industry is going to settle, if it will ever settle. What I do know is that the two classic models of publishing, which have existed in one form or another for many years, are not working for authors. This seems incredibly stupid to me because it is clear that readers (whether they be e-readers or print readers) are insatiable and love good new work. It’s what makes writers write, and many publishers publish. If tapped, it can also make publishers run successful businesses. I believe in my company, in part because I we can contribute to changing this injustice.