https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

Self-publishing and readers

Some good-sounding advice on how to make self-publishing benefit readers … which, not-coincidentally, will then benefit the authors serving them. #ddtb

Reshared post from +Chuck Wendig

So, we know that self-publishing benefits authors in certain ways, right?

Question then becomes: does self-publishing benefit readers?

My answer: Not yet it doesn't.

But it can. And here's how it starts.

http://terribleminds.com/ramble/2012/01/12/how-t-self-publish-so-it-benefits-readers/

Embedded Link

How To Self-Publish So It Benefits Readers?

34 view(s)  

3 thoughts on “Self-publishing and readers”

  1. I don’t know how to put this clearly, but this post put my hackles up. I’m going to ramble here, I guess because there’s this “go Chuck” cult on his website lately and I don’t want to get eaten alive, and because your post was what actually set me off.

    I’m not saying the ideas in the post are bad. They’re fine techniques.

    However, independently published ebooks *don’t* benefit readers? WTF?

    Indie ebooks are a crap shoot, but so are big publisher ebooks.

    The formatting of big publisher ebooks has been almost legendarily bad. (Tor does a great job most of the time, but they seem to be an exception.) For example, “Make the Bread, Buy the Butter” had a 600-page sample of the same 10 pages…in shrinking column sizes, some three or four characters wide. (Published by Simon & Schuster.)

    And big-publisher covers have been a crap shoot for a long time; writers complain about them all the time, with good reason. Want a cover that represents something actually in your book, with characters that resemble those in your book? Too bad; have a dragon.

    And big-publisher editing has been a crap shoot–you hear horror stories of writers whose books are barely looked at, or whose agents have to do most of the editing before it’s submitted, or whose editors are fresh out of college and asking for huge rewrites that don’t fit with the books.

    And marketing. Yeah. You hear a ton about how GREAT the big publishers handle marketing, and how a writer can just write a book, then sit back and write another one, without having to do a lot of that other crap in between.

    And, finally, to say that indie writers need to slow down: what, to the same rate as big publshers? Taking two years to get a book out? AFTER it’s written? Just because a book hasn’t been edited for five years doesn’t mean it isn’t any good.

    How do these things benefit the reader? They don’t. They benefit the publisher.

    I’m reading good stuff, because I have the knowledge that I must read at least part of the sample before I buy any ebook, no matter how much I want it before I buy it–especially when it comes to the big publishers. NOBODY can screw up an ebook like the big publishers. 600 pages, Dave. It’s not hard to pick out books all by yourself, even if they have 50 five-star reviews from the writer’s relatives. You just put your big girl panties on and read the sample. I can be my own acquiring editor. I’m not the only one figuring this out.

    Some independent ebook writers and publishers have consistently outclassed the big publishers. More of us need to do so. To say that indie writers and publishers don’t always act professionally–okay, I get that.

    But to say that self-publishing doesn’t benefit the readers? Then why are they reading the ebooks? The admittedly flawed ebooks?

    /rant. For now.

    1. Don’t beat around the bush, De, tell us what you really think!

      You make a whole bunch of good points. I *think* Chuck’s theme here (or what I took from it, which may or may not be the same thing) is that indie ebook thing is more providing advantages (quicker publishing, better royalties, more control) for writers than for readers. The suggestions are more how writers of ebooks can provide added value (aside from their writing) to readers.

      I didn’t see him as saying that writers should slow down indie ebooks to publisher speeds. I think taking the time to make sure they are well-edited will serve the reader — and, ultimately, the writer — better than cranking them out as fast as they can be typed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *