Bad News for Self-Published Authors

Visit any writer’s forum and you’ll find this debate: traditional publishing vs. self-publishing. The debate often becomes heated as writers (often amature) hash out the pros and cons of going the self-published route. However, I rarely see this question, “What is your objective?” This is an important question. If the answer is, “I just want to see my words in print, I don’t care about the quality or financial gain,” then self-publishing will serve your needs.

If quality, financial success, and your own credibility as an author concern you, then there are a few things to keep in mind about self-publishing.

Quality

The traditional gatekeepers who make it difficult to get published also ensure that the books they release meet market standards. These standards not only include the technical quality of plot, characterization and pacing, but the mechanical skills of grammar, spelling and typographical errors.

I recently received a number of review copies from AuthorHouse. I was astounded, not only by the lack of writing technique, but by the overwhelming number of basic mechanical errors. This is due to the lack of quality control–no proofreaders, no copy editors. Without the benefit of trained professionals it is easy for these simple errors to make it through to your final copy.

Serious authors who are considering the self-publishing process should at least invest in professional help. A copy-editor can give you valuable insight regarding the technical aspects of your work. If something isn’t working, swallow your pride and consider revisions. A proofreader can at least let your know where you’ve made mechanical errors, but without a sound structure, you’re waxing a rusty car.

Financial Success

As a self-published author it can be difficult to offset your expenses when you’re saddled with production costs and the burden of self-promotion. If your product does not meet market standards, this will become even more difficult. No amount of guerilla marketing can make up for poor quality.

Self-publishers don’t care about the quality of your book, because they have nothing invested, you do.

Bob Young, founder of Lulu.com admitted in a Publishers Weekly article Turning Bad Books into Big Bucks, “We publish a huge number of really bad books.”  As PW’s Jim Milliot points out, “Rather than publish hundreds of thousands of copies of a few books, Lulu’s mission is to publish 100 copies of 100,000 books.”

Traditional publishers have a vested interest in your book. With a warehouse full of printed copies, they want to make sure your book sells. You will play a primary role in the marketing of your book, but you’ll have professional publicists backing you up.

Credibility

Considering the quality of most self-published books, serious authors who do choose to go the self-published route may encounter extreme prejudice when shopping manuscripts to traditional publishers and literary agents later on.

On his website write2sell, Stephen King’s first editor, Mike Garrett, bluntly addresses the issue:

“I’m sorry, but industry professionals have not changed their minds. Self-publication is no indication at all that you’re a talented writer. It only means that you were willing to spend your own money to be published . . . In some instances self-publishing non-fiction books can make sense. Self-publishing fiction, however, is a waste of time and money.”

For many writers, self-publishing has become the path of least resistance, but just as a good plot develops out of conflict, good writers develop from the pushback of those more experienced. In the long run, it’s better to pay your dues than to pay a publisher.