The Independent

Self Publishers and Libel

I just read the story in PW about AuthorHouse losing a libel suit. At first I was surprised because from my slightly snobby publisher perspective, I always just thought of places like AuthorHouse as glorified print vendors for the masses.

Since beginning my freelance venture I have done some more research on self-publishing companies. I want my job to be connecting authors with readers using my publishing knowledge without necessarily being a publisher. Self-published authors seem like the perfect market for such a service.

My research lead me to start changing my opinion of self publishing.  Each company has a slightly different version of the same racket, and honestly some aren't so bad. I am particularly intrigued by Lulu. Basically some of these places are very good tools for authors to approach the publication of their book in a different way. Some authors, such as Lars Clausen have used the self publishing system  in a very effective manor. And any book blogger worth their salt knows about POD-DY MOUTH, a blog dedicated to reviewing the best and worst that the self publishing world has to offer (bless her heart, as that seems like a very onerous task to me).

The problem is that self publishing companies need to promote themselves as "publishers" in order to attract clients. But "publishing" is hardly what they do. Self-publishing companies print, they design (sort of), and they open distribution channels. More than anything they dedicate their time signing more authors to feed the machine. What they don't do is read the books they produce. I wonder if AuthorHouse didn't refer to itself as a "publisher" if they would still be held responsible. When I worked at Barricade Books we were sued more than a few times, but no one ever sued our printer.

The last thought on this is unrelated to libel, it is how eerily similar the self-publishing experience is to many author's experiences at "real" publishers. I bet there are some publishers out there that don't even read their own books.  As a matter of fact, I know it.

This all really begs a question of what is publishing? Is it editing? Printing? Designing? Distributing? Promoting? Marketing? I have long argued that publishing is a process of developing a great idea or a great writer into a valuable product. Printing, designing, distributing, and marketing can all be part of that process. But those things can also confuse publishers about what they are really here to do.

Cash Flow

Peter Winkler over at Precious Cargo asked me (I'm paraphrasing) why publishers choose to publish more books than they can really pay attention to.

Well, there are a couple of reasons:

1 - Cash Flow. Because books are 100% returnable by retailers and wholesalers publishers can get caught into a real cash flow crunch when returns come in. Publishers need to keep pushing as many titles out the door as possible to hide the credits due for last season's returns. This allows cash to keep flowing, salaries to be paid, new books to be acquired, etc.

2 - The 80/20 Rule. Book publishers have based their business on the notion that 20% of the books they publish will float the 80% that fails. If publishers could find a way to publish only the profitable 20%, they would. But no one can guarantee a book's success. So publishers respond with this kind of thinking: "if we need 20 successful books this year, we need to publish 100 titles." I'm over simplifying for the sake of the argument, but you get the point.

Marketing from the Publisher's Perspective

Last week I read this post by Jason Pinter on M.J. Rose's Buzz, Balls & Hype. He wrote:

Marketplace. Makes you angry, doesn't it? All writers hate this word. The marketplace. The marketplace. They hate the evil marketplace, how publishers cater towards this pernicious entity, trying to publish books that appeal to the marketplace. I hear from unpublished writers all the time who refuse to acknowledge the whims of this marketplace, who refuse to steer their works towards such a terrible destination.

The funny thing about this is that, at least in my experience, a lot of publishers don't really like "the marketplace" or "marketing" generally. Most people get into publishing because they think books are special things. There is an on-going battle between the publishing people who refer to books as "products" and those who don't.

 

The publishers in the "books aren't products" camp tend to approach marketing as a necessary evil. Publishers are too focused on jumping through B&Ns hoops to get maximum lay-downs and preserve their cash flow. I've been there and done that, so I'm sympathetic to the issues the publishers have to deal with .

The sad part of all of this is that publishers end up focused on marketing to impress retailers. When a publisher is looking to market to the broadest possible audience so as to get the biggest possible B&N lay-down, that is when the "watering down effect" can come in to play.

The urge to indulge in that kind of thinking is a big part of what pushed me out of my publishing job. Now that I am a publishing outsider, I am really excited about marketing. I am really excited to get involved with books that do something unique for a unique group of people. I am excited about the prospect of bringing organically developed, great ideas to people the who will be interested in those ideas.

That process is all about marketing. If you have a great book idea and you are afraid of marketing, chances are no one will ever know about your book. Embrace it. Enjoy it.

The key is that the publishing process stay focused on two things:

1. Developing a great idea into a great book

2. Connecting the great idea with the right readers.

If you buy into the whole Long Tail thing, you know that there are plenty of customers out there for just about any idea. The trick is finding them. That is marketing, and it is not evil. It can actually be fun.