Posts
Today I want to look at Publicity.
Traditional:
- Pros:
- Sometimes you get a publicist!
- You have a name behind you
- You have wider exposure in print
- Cons:
- Most new authors have to promote themselves
- Other books from the publisher may take precedence
Indie/Small Press:
- Pros:
- You can release more books in a shorter period of time (provided you still use professional editing/copyediting/design etc.)
- The publisher (sometimes you) might be better invested in your book.
- Cons:
- You definitely have to promote yourself
- You can pretty much count B&N out unless you are doing NOOK.
The truth is I'm not sure I see much of a difference in work unless you are one of the lucky few the big five decide to help publicize. The biggest difference is in traditional print and availability. It's not impossible with Indie by any means, but in a large chain it is.
What did I miss? Fill me in!
I think you've raised a lot of good points about the pros and cons of both. I'm just glad there are so many options out there for writers. There's no right or wrong answer. Just what works for you and your book.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you that they can co-exist. It's all about what is best for the author and the author's career at said time. I truly believe that.
ReplyDeleteI also believe that indie and traditional publishing can co-exist. Both have their pros and cons, like you listed, so it's silly to me when people try to insist that there's only one true way.
ReplyDeleteGreat pros/cons. I would add to the list...
ReplyDeleteTrad-pro: you have access to big-name reviewers that indies do not.
Indie-pro: you are free to give away as many review copies as you wish, and make up for in grassroots volume what you lack in big-name reviews.
Trad-con: sometimes your hands are tied by your contract/publisher. Want to release a short story to augment your release? Maybe not. Want to give away paper or ebook copies in a contest. Not unless your publisher okays it.
Trad-pro: they can get you into libraries that indies can't reach.
Indie-pro (and this is the big one): NO ONE is as invested in your book as you are. NO ONE. (No matter how much your publisher says they love you, they have someone else they love more - i.e. whoever is making the most money for them right now.) As an indie, you have the flexibility to break rules, invest in your work, and pretty much market without restriction, however you choose.
Great points (and the comments on this post are helpful to read too!)
ReplyDeleteGreat post. I think it also depends on the book's genre, too. For instance, I recently published a young adult book with a self-publishing company and I've had lots of requests to review it from bloggers. There seem to be a lot of YA-focused blogs around, and it's a genre that's done well in self-publishing - look at Amanda Hocking!
ReplyDeleteAwesome, Lisa. I'm sure you'll be able to fill out the list in another six months.
ReplyDeleteCouldn't agree with you more. Publishing deals aren't as important as they used to be....unless they get REALLY excited about your book.
ReplyDeleteThe Positives of being Indie: You can choose to stop when you want, not when the publisher goes belly up! You have complete control over title, editing, cover, distribution. You lose weight as an Indie . . . guaranteed because you do everything and it's a huge job. Loving every minute of it, btw.
ReplyDeleteGood points. There's always a path that 'feels right.' We just have to figure out which one is that one. :-)
ReplyDeleteGreat points! I was just talking about this at my recent CBWLA workshop. Either way you need to do a lot of self-promotion to spread the word about your books. But Indie authors definitely have to do twice the amount of work compared to the traditonally published authors.
ReplyDeleteNutschell
www.thewritingnut.com
well, you're certainly right about one thing: Most traditional authors do the bulk of their own publicity. Only the very few get that big marketing push.
ReplyDeleteWhat's disappointing about that is then you're judged based on your numbers whether you'll get another traditional deal--even if it's a series.
No such problems in indie! :o) <3
This is going to be a great series of posts, I can tell already - I don't have much exposure to the inner workings of indie publishing, and it'll be nice to know what really goes on and why it's different (but not necessarily better or worse) than traditional publishing. :) Thanks!
ReplyDeleteYup - I don't think there's much difference in the publicity department for most people with debuts. There are going to be some exceptions, but regardless, publicity is a lot of hard work!
ReplyDeleteglad to see someone say it's not about competition. we are all in it to get our masterpieces out there. how you choose to do it, more power to ya! great post. new follower, hi!!
ReplyDeleteThis is all about right. Although I was assigned a publicist, I've still had to do everything myself anyway.
ReplyDeleteSooooooooooo much to think about. Cyber brain freeze.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, the biggest difference is up front costs. With traditional, you don't have to pay up front. But if we go indie, and we don't want to put icky stuff out there, we have to pay the cost of professional editing, printing some books (if we go that route), and quality book covers. Otherwise, I don't see much of a difference. Which, to me, is a GREAT thing!
ReplyDeleteOne thing I'm concerned about is the sometimes negative association with self-publishing because of a high number of poorly edited or published-too-soon books. I think reviews certainly help even this out. I have to know a writer personally to buy a self-pub or it has to have a huge following.
ReplyDeleteNice to see this so succinctly put. Today it seems everyone has to promote themselves no matter how they are published.
ReplyDelete