The publishing industry has changed over the last few years. There are many events that made this shift possible. One of them is the publishing industry’s acceptance – some might even say, embrace – of the self-published book. Many traditional publishing houses even created their own website to help in this effort.
Of course, the advent of the personal computer and the Internet were the ultimate catalyst, as it was for many changes in society. But there are two other more recent and major events responsible for the change in publishing: the advent of the digital reader and the devastated economy. The publishing industry has been hit hard just like the rest of business in the United States. Borders Books just went out of business. The brick and mortar stores are suffering and traditional publishing houses are losing money. They no longer want, nor can afford, to take a chance on an unknown author. So they shifted part of their focus to making money helping the writer publish his or her own work – something to keep their bottom line out of the red. But it isn’t only the publishing houses offering these services; many entrepreneurs saw the opportunity long ago. Those who saw a niche market made printing and delivering of either “dead tree” or digital books convenient and almost effortless through new innovations.
The next obstacle for those writers who wanted to forgo the drudgery and uncertainty embedding in the traditional route to publishing was the question of where to sell his or her products. The same Internet businesses that provided services for self-publishing were also waiting in the wings to provide a venue for their sales – businesses like Amazon, Smashwords and Lulu.com. Everything that was once difficult became easy.
It is the last problem that is proving the most difficult for the self-published writer: marketing.
The hushed talk among self-published authors these days – and those of us who are about to self-publish – is no longer about acceptance or about the “how to” but about reviews.
Without a traditional publishing house’s marketing budget behind us, we only have ourselves – and possibly our friends and family ― to shout the praises of our work. The one way our friends and family can help is to write a review. Without reviews our work will never get to the top of the very large heap on places like Amazon. There are a few other marketing options. Book trailers have become very popular, for instance, and there is always Facebook and Twitter. But what the self-published writer covets more than anything is positive reviews. It is our ego boost; our vote of confidence; our selection from the slush pile.
Self-published writers like to help each other. It is a large and supportive community. We beta read before publication. We write reviews after. On the surface writers “swapping” reviews appears somehow unethical. But a friend of mine said (and I’m paraphrasing big time here) that, in the traditional publishing business, one writer praising another is as long-standing and entrenched as the world’s “oldest profession.” Looking at the books on my bookshelf, I’d have to agree. One author providing an endorsement on the book flap of another author seems fairly common.
So, what’s the difference? Do we really believe that these established and well-know authors weren’t either paid or coerced into giving a positive statement to use for marketing purposes? Why should the self-publishing industry be held to a higher standard? I would argue that one reason is that self-published books don’t go through the rigors of acquisition, where the not-up-for-prime-time manuscripts are pulled out like so many chickweeds. But, if self-published writers support each other by only giving good reviews how will the reader ever know what is worth their time? Will they start to distrust all self-published books and stop buying?
That’s the big question, of course. But I think there is an answer and it might be simpler than you think.
As evidence, I give you a review by W. J. Rosser of Fred Limberg’s novel, Ferris’ Bluff. Mr. Rosser points out the good things in the novel and discusses, in his opinion, one small weakness – which didn’t deter him from enjoying the book any more than it would have had this been a traditionally published book. He deemed it a worthwhile read – a very worthwhile read. He didn’t have to call it the next Great American Novel. And I’m sure Mr. Limberg didn’t expect, nor want, him to. (I’m not suggesting Mr. Limberg even knew Mr. Rosser was going to write a review, just to be clear.) He seems quite happy with what was said about his book. This is a good review because it rings true. It sounds honest. And it is.
Superlatives and all-glowing praise always raises a red flag. Not even the greatest writers of our day, or those from the past, have all positive reviews. We hope for a good review but we need to put on our Teflon vests and realize we might have to take a few bullets. The pros do. If we want to play with the big boys, then we have to take the good with the bad.
Is there anything wrong with the first couple of reviews acting as an “endorsement” from one writer to another? I’m not really sure anymore. At first I thought this was just plain wrong; now I’m having doubts. Unless you feel all marketing and advertising is wrong (which might be left for another argument) then how is this different? It is one of the few tools the self-published writer has. If we consider the first few reviews as a “book jacket endorsement” and state “fellow writer so-and-so says this about…”, then it isn’t very different than the way traditional houses do business. And do you really think they don’t have their own staff of “professional” reviewers that pad the comment section with positive statements? I wasn’t born yesterday, and neither were you.
Here is a quote from the blog of Pete Morin, a fellow writer and acquaintance of mine: “Even the New York Times Bestseller List suffers its own peculiar brand of artifice. When you ask an entire industry of publishing professional [sic] how the NYT defines a bestseller and none of them can give you the same definitive answer, you have to suspect something is rigged. When a novel appears on the list and is on the bargain table two months later, you just know it.”
Perhaps if the self-published industry came up with a generally accepted policy – an “honor code” of sorts – that once a writer has a few endorsements then he or she should expect to receive more discerning reviews from their fellow writers.
What, I except, we are all afraid of is retaliation. If I give a book a less than stellar review, will the other writer be honest about my book or will they be spiteful? This is human nature. I’m not suggesting we all start to give overly harsh reviews, just perhaps be a little more honest. What’s wrong with giving a book a 3 star review on Amazon? It means “I liked it.” And for 99 cents, “I liked it” would be enough to make be purchase the book.
I don’t know the answer. Personally, if I didn’t feel pressured (either self-induced or from outside forces) to only say positive things when I left a review, I might be inclined to leave more. After all, it is MY reputation as a discerning reader (how can I be a good writer if I praise books that don’t hold up?) that is on the line. I don’t want to be known as someone who gives false reviews.
There is another point I would like to make. I’m not suggesting fellow writers need or should leave overly harsh reviews on self-published books. Why? Because traditionally published books have, supposedly, gone through the rigors of being accepted for publication. They have been selected by industry experts who are “authorities” on what is worthy and what isn’t. They have been given the industry’s seal of approval. Therefore, I feel it is perfectly acceptable to hold them to a higher standard. When I review a self-published book, I’m rating it on that scale –of what is the best within the self-published community. A self-published book might be as good or even better than a traditionally published book. If it is, then it should get high praise indeed. But if it isn’t, we don’t need to be as highly critical either.
In the end, the phrase “I don’t know” seems appropriate. I don’t know what the answer is. Each individual will have to decide for themselves what is ethical and what isn’t. The general public is pretty savvy. They have ways of filtering out the chaff from the wheat. Perhaps we don’t need to worry so much about honest reviews but just making our work as good as it can be and getting it out there.
Here’s the problem: so many authors are going down the self-publishing route that anything worth reading gets lost under the welter of dross. Ok, so there are filtering systems, such as on Amazon (highest reviews sort) but most self-publishing sites only feature reviews by friends and family. Certainly, I wouldn’t trust the cover review of a TP novel unless by a literary supplement, and those are becoming fewer. Then perhaps it is possible to gauge some true merit from 20+ Amazon reviews – many of which are well-written – but that number tends to be only for the big names. So, need success in order to gain more success. Where do you start?
As a self-published author myself, I found the only way to get a reasonable amount of interest is to make the ebook version free. As a niche genre, science fiction is a challenge on another scale, which is why i’m still hoping to go down the traditional route with my second … until there is a true paradigm shift in the way books are judged.
Posted by adrian kyte | August 19, 2011, 3:06 pmAdrian, I believe the market, itself, will find a solution – it will surface on its own. And I think it would be a shame if the demise of the new-found respect for SP novels was hurt by the very people who need and embrace it.
Posted by J.S. Colley | August 19, 2011, 3:55 pmReviews are very important – no doubt about it. I have seen it written more than once that bad reviews count just as much as good ones because they make the reviews more ‘real’. People tend to ignore 1 star reviews as much as they do 5 star, because the world is full of vindictive souls who think ‘if I don’t like it, it’s crap’. You have only to look at Dan Brown and JK Rowling.
Reviews can only help and I’m sorry, Adrian, I don’t think giving an e-book away does.
Posted by Greta van der Rol | August 19, 2011, 5:02 pmI think the problem here is drawing a distinction between self-published or independently published and traditionally published as if there should be more than one standard. I don’t see that this happened in the indie record world and I don’t want to see it happening in the indie publishing world. A book is a book. End of story. I make no distinction on my own blog. I’ve reviewed all sorts and will continue to do so. What I worry about are the sites where you would think there was nothing else out there bar indie books.
As far as reviews go I know there has been a definite shift towards online reviewing but many of the ‘reviews’ I read are not reviews, they’re notifications: such and such has a new book out, this is what the blurb says it’s about, I’d give it five stars and here’s where you can buy it. I would like to see a code of practice for online reviewers, a standard, and we can all have the logo on our sites: plumbers do it so why not reviewers? And the first thing I would have on the list? Don’t review a book you have not personally read and if you’ve not read all of it, say so, and why not.
Amazon ‘reviews’ are a different kettle of fish entirely and I think we all need to treat them accordingly and not be in awe of a book with a dozen five-star reviews. This is water cooler chat and needs to be regarded as such. That doesn’t mean that you can’t trust any review on Amazon and that they were all written by mates (or enemies) of the author but we do need to use our common sense. I gave my own first novel a four-star review on Goodreads because I think that was a fair review. Some others have given it five stars – I’ve had a couple of 7/10’s elsewhere – but the important thing is that the critics have discussed the merits of the book.
I will review books by people I know but they know they’ll get treated like everyone else. I draw no distinctions. I’m not a harsh reviewer at the best of times but I’d like to get to the stage where if I say there’s a book out there that you must read people take my opinion seriously. If I gave everything a glowing review how would anyone know what was the truly good stuff?
Posted by Jim Murdoch | August 20, 2011, 6:25 amYou bring up some interesting ideas, Jim. As always, the implementaion of new ideas is complicated and difficult. But I’m confident the community as a whole will come up with an agreeable solution to this situation.
Posted by J.S. Colley | August 20, 2011, 10:45 amI’d LOVE to see a generally accepted protocol for reviewing on Amazon, etc. – 1 to 5 stars, in each of several categories and a minimum of 150 words required. These 5 star “it was awesome” reviews are worthless.
Posted by Pete | August 20, 2011, 12:48 pmHi, this is WJ Rosser. First of all, thanks for the kind words about my review blog. I think there are a number of good comments here, and I appreciate the discussion. I think reviews themselves are inherently difficult to codify by stars at all. In my blog, I don’t give stars. (I do in my required reading blog. In fact, I have negative reviews there. I guess it’s easier to assault a dead author than a live one!) One of the problems is that books aren’t necessarily comparable to one another in an easily codified way.
Let me offer an example. I think that the Lee Child series of books about Jack Reacher are great books. I also think the Lord of the Rings is fabulous. I also think The Red Badge of Courage is amazing. How do you compare those books one to another? They have different audiences, different expectations, and different standards. I might give the movie “Tombstone” five stars for what it is and “The Unforgiven” five stars for what it is. They’re both westerns, but they’re not even close to the same kind of films, and I believe the latter is a far better film. Now, compare a very funny comedy like “Groundhog Day” to “Citizen Cane.” I’d give them both five stars, as well. That doesn’t mean that Bill Murray is the equal to Orson Welles–no way! Stars make it easy to create a mathematical reference for the book, but the contents of the reviews are far more important than a one-shot codification.
As for negative reviews, I just don’t post them for non-established writers. I do (as you pointed out) indicated areas of weakness in a book I liked; but I’m not interested in telling someone to avoid a book, so if I read something I think is bad, I just let the author know (if the review was prompted by a communication with the author) that I can’t be positive about it. This is a personal choice. I know my opinion is just one opinion, and I want to share books I enjoy rather than warn people away from books I don’t. I think your conclusion on the issue is right on target, Julie. Authors will start out with softer reviews and gradually see more critical reviews. That’s the nature of success and a wider readership.
The new world of publishing has created great opportunities for authors and restored some that all but disappeared with the consolidation of most small presses into the handful of large publishers. This does indeed mean that there will be a lot of junk out there, but it also means people like Fred Limberg will get a chance to have their fine work read.
Posted by Walter Jeremiah Rosser | August 23, 2011, 11:48 amGreat response, Walter.
If the buying public knew where to find sites like yours (and Booksquawk.com) — one where they can find honest reviews of self-published or indie books(and,yes, everything is subjective but all we’re talking about here is winnowing out the really bad stuff)– then that would be a great help to the industry.
Janet (not Julie)
Posted by J.S. Colley | August 23, 2011, 12:18 pmMany apologies JANET. (I’ll say that fifty times in my head to remember in the future.)
Posted by Walter Jeremiah Rosser | August 23, 2011, 7:07 pmThat’s what I get for using my initials! No problem. My grandmother would be happy. Her name was Julia.
Posted by J.S. Colley | August 23, 2011, 7:31 pmHave been meaning to place a comment regarding this post for sometime now; hope you will excuse my delay. I know you speak of this conundrum as it relates to writers and reviews but I see this as a direct effect on all the arts, religion, politics – anything and everything man makes as goods to sell. We are definitely in the midst of the Information Overload Age via the computer. Maybe there is some truth to the 2012 theory and that when man knows everything there is to know our brains will explode into a black hole in the universe?
I read so many reviews I have no time left to read. I pick anything I buy off the net by how many stars it gets. I am guilty. Most times the 5 star item is wrong for me. And I am normal. Paint a beautiful painting or write a wonderful novel or invent a better mousetrap and the people will come no matter what the critics will say. It is all subjective so therefore if you are to be a critic (or an artist) honesty is always the best policy.
Posted by Corliss | August 27, 2011, 5:38 pmThe problem with writing, as opposed to visual arts, is that WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) does not apply. You have to actually READ the entire book before you know if you like it or not. In this sense, the reader (or consumer) must rely on those who have already “experienced” the art to give them an honest assessment, based on some standard objective criteria that can be quantified (because, as you say, much of it is subjective). This is the big dilemma in the publishing industry, both traditional and indie. As I said, I really don’t have a good answer. But, as you say, normally the cream rises to the top on its own.
Posted by J.S. Colley | August 28, 2011, 11:18 am