# The downhill slide with self-publishing



## The Backward OX (May 2, 2011)

Standards for spelling, punctuation and grammar are universally bad and getting worse, and now, with self-publishing - including _*e*-_books_ -_ in full flow, there’s nothing left to prevent the world being swamped by even lower standards. 

And it’s not only spag. It’s also the basic storyline. Poor expression will get through to the readers, because there’s no one there to check it and turf out the rubbish. 

Before very much more time has elapsed, no one repeat no one will know how to write correctly. You’ll all be reading pap. And using it as your own poor standard when _you_ begin writing.

It’s a sorry old world in which we live, where decent standards are subservient to some other god.


----------



## kennyc (May 2, 2011)

This has been happening since the web emerged. Even commercial site such as the new stations 9News here in Denver have gone downhill with more and more typos and grammatical errors. There are two edges to that sword. The ease of publication and sharing of information is a good thing the errors and misinformation are bad. The thing I hope to see is an opportunity for editors and gatekeeper (publication) sites which winnow the chaff and point to the kernels. The reputation of these reliable sites should hopefully assure their continuation.


----------



## WriterJohnB (May 2, 2011)

It's worse than that. Not only is there no one to check spag, content, etc., the  new breed won't listen to any criticism. They've been raised to think that it doesn't matter if you lose the ball game, you're still a winner. If you don't get good grades in school, they'll lower the standards for you. If the teacher says you're a discipline problem, mommy will be positive the teacher has it in for you (year after year) and society will say it's not your fault, you have autism, A.D.D. or dyslexia, so it's not your fault. If you don't have enough money to buy all the **** you want, they'll give you credit. It's true of every aspect of modern life, it's never YOUR fault.

I've been critiquing on line for years and very often my critiques are taken as attacks, because the young "author" is so positive his\her work is brilliant. Two of these cultured, erudite, scholarly writers have threatened to find me and beat me up or worse. (I sent them my address and invited them to drop by.)

The dumbing down of the world can't be stopped.

JohnB


----------



## Baron (May 2, 2011)

WriterJohnB said:


> It's worse than that. Not only is there no one to check spag, content, etc., the  new breed won't listen to any criticism. They've been raised to think that it doesn't matter if you lose the ball game, you're still a winner. If you don't get good grades in school, they'll lower the standards for you. If the teacher says you're a discipline problem, mommy will be positive the teacher has it in for you (year after year) and society will say it's not your fault, you have autism, A.D.D. or dyslexia, so it's not your fault. If you don't have enough money to buy all the **** you want, they'll give you credit. It's true of every aspect of modern life, it's never YOUR fault.
> 
> I've been critiquing on line for years and very often my critiques are taken as attacks, because the young "author" is so positive his\her work is brilliant. Two of these cultured, erudite, scholarly writers have threatened to find me and beat me up or worse. (I sent them my address and invited them to drop by.)
> 
> ...


 
You're right on one level.  The internet combined with the "everyone should have a degree" mentality, with the resultant lowering of standards, means that a lot of rubbish is out there which would have been filtered out by traditional publishing.

There's another side to this however.  The egalitarian policies exploited in the west, which deny the fact that some people are more gifted in particular areas than others, really effects only those who can't pay for a good education.  

There's been a lot of rubbish fiction out there even with traditional publishing and there have also been classics, those books and authors who stand the test of time.  The danger is that those authors who will meet that standard will be, as it was until the early part of the twentieth century, only those who can afford a good private education.  The publishing method is less important than the product and the cream will still rise to the top.  It will just be a more privileged cream.


----------



## Foxee (May 2, 2011)

The Backward OX said:


> Standards for spelling, punctuation and grammar are universally bad and getting worse, and now, with self-publishing - including _*e*-_books_ -_ in full flow, there’s nothing left to prevent the world being swamped by even lower standards.



Of course there is something to prevent this, Ox, there's you. Not you personally (though it's a valiant effort) but readers and the market in general. Readers are going to catch on to the fact that the product that they are paying good coin for is something that may not be entirely worth even a modest expense. They may buy the first time but once they realize that a certain author doesn't have the legibility, storytelling ability, or organizational know-how to write a really good book they won't be back to buy more of that author's work.

Buyers aren't going to put up with a pig in a poke on a repeat basis. They'll demand to see pages from inside the book at the very least (as Amazon already offers for traditional print books) to get a sense of what they're buying. Authors will have to gain the readers' trust and when they do, they'll not only have readers, they'll have followers. This is something you strive for when you sell something anyway...repeat customers.



> Before very much more time has elapsed, no one repeat no one will know how to write correctly. You’ll all be reading pap. And using it as your own poor standard when _you_ begin writing.


 Nah, I don't buy it. I think that might happen with large groups of people, sure, but that will end up creating jobs for the people who do learn how to write and who like to. Supply and demand...good writers will be in demand.

People are already reading pap...the newsstand with its endless offerings for magazines about TV shows (soap opera digest, seriously??), games, and movies make me wonder if the original thought is an endangered species.

Don't despair, though, Ox, the fat lady hasn't sung for writing just yet.


----------



## garza (May 2, 2011)

Look at AP, once held up as the standard for young journalists to follow. AP staffers were the cream of the crop. Even lowly stringers could hold their heads up high when their dispatches were carried by the AP. Today there is hardly a story published by AP that does not have some sort of error in grammar, usage, punctuation, or information. 

In truth, however, the language began its downhill slide when Gutenberg first cut a block of type apart so he could move the letters around. (In a recent article the Associated Press reported that Gutenberg invented the printing press.) The Internet has steepened the slope. Take Wikipaedia. I know a fellow who edits the birthdays of people every year so he can say he has the same birthday. If you don't like the facts, do your own editing. 

The new standard of journalism is, 'If it didn't happen that way, it should've'.


----------



## NicholasJAmbrose (May 3, 2011)

.


----------



## Olly Buckle (May 3, 2011)

It's all going to pot, Americanisms are creeping into the language, people slur words together and don't enunciate properly any more, they have no idea of spelling or grammar, politeness is an old fashioned virtue, the modern dress sense is atrocious, The Times no longer has advertisements on the front page, there is all this strange foreign food in the shops and no-one cooks proper meals any more, children are loud and obstreperous, the money isn't worth anything since we went off the gold standard/decimal, modern cars have no character, all these modern gadgets break down as soon as you look at them, and The Ox has lost the epithet "Curmudgeon".


----------



## kennyc (May 3, 2011)

Olly Buckle said:


> It's all going to pot, Americanisms are creeping into the language, people slur words together and don't enunciate properly any more, they have no idea of spelling or grammar, politeness is an old fashioned virtue, the modern dress sense is atrocious, The Times no longer has advertisements on the front page, there is all this strange foreign food in the shops and no-one cooks proper meals any more, children are loud and obstreperous, the money isn't worth anything since we went off the gold standard/decimal, modern cars have no character, all these modern gadgets break down as soon as you look at them, and The Ox has lost the epithet "Curmudgeon".


 

Hey!  Watch it with the "Americanisms!"



You are right though about the rest.


----------



## The Backward OX (May 3, 2011)

garza said:


> In truth, however, the language began its downhill slide when Gutenberg first cut a block of type apart so he could move the letters around.


 
I thought it may have gone back to the ancient Egyptians


----------



## kennyc (May 3, 2011)

Just think .... if we wrote in hieroglyphs today...hmmm...


----------



## John Yeoman (May 5, 2011)

A further disturbing aspect of the growth of the _cloaca maximus_ (the great sewer) of web self-publishing is that, in a desperate bid to get any live bodies to read their pap, self-publishing authors are dropping their prices to foolish levels, like 99 cents. The argument is, a pdf costs nothing to produce so it's all profit. But if 99 cents or less becomes the market expectation for a 'typical' ebook, there's no motivation for those of us who try to produce quality material.

Would I rather sell 1000 books at 99c or 10 at $20? An accountant would argue for the first option, but I'd rather have 10 quality readers who valued my book enough to pay a sensible price. Perhaps half of them will go on to buy my next book at $20 (or even a higher-priced information product at $100). 

But I doubt if anyone whose price expectaion is 99c would spend $20 with me next time, let alone $100. And I'd have to sell at least 10,000 digital copies of a book at 99c to be sensibly compensated for the several months I took in producing it. Maybe Cory Doctorow or Amanda Hocking can do that in a week but, for the rest of us, 10,000 sales is a tough call.


----------



## Baron (May 5, 2011)

John Yeoman said:


> A further disturbing aspect of the growth of the _cloaca maximus_ (the great sewer) of web self-publishing is that, in a desperate bid to get any live bodies to read their pap, self-publishing authors are dropping their prices to foolish levels, like 99 cents. The argument is, a pdf costs nothing to produce so it's all profit. But if 99 cents or less becomes the market expectation for a 'typical' ebook, there's no motivation for those of us who try to produce quality material.
> 
> Would I rather sell 1000 books at 99c or 10 at $20? An accountant would argue for the first option, but I'd rather have 10 quality readers who valued my book enough to pay a sensible price. Perhaps half of them will go on to buy my next book at $20 (or even a higher-priced information product at $100).
> 
> But I doubt if anyone whose price expectaion is 99c would spend $20 with me next time, let alone $100. And I'd have to sell at least 10,000 digital copies of a book at 99c to be sensibly compensated for the several months I took in producing it. Maybe Cory Doctorow or Amanda Hocking can do that in a week but, for the rest of us, 10,000 sales is a tough call.


 
Another take on this is that agents and traditional publishers are now regarding high self-publishing figures when they take on new authors.  I suspect that they'll still rate the writer who sells 500 copies at £9.00 (the average for a British paperback), or digital at £4.99, than they'll rate the person who sells 1,000 at 99 pence.


----------



## John Yeoman (May 5, 2011)

Baron said:


> Another take on this is that agents and traditional publishers are now regarding high self-publishing figures when they take on new authors.  I suspect that they'll still rate the writer who sells 500 copies at £9.00 (the average for a British paperback), or digital at £4.99, than they'll rate the person who sells 1,000 at 99 pence.



It's a fascinating trend to watch. The publishing industry is now beginning reluctantly to acknowledge the validity of a self-published work. Up to just a year or so ago, self-publishing was equated with vanity publishing. No reviewer or major bookshop would touch a vanity/self-published work - and First Publication Rights ruled out any possibility of a publisher taking on a book that had seen the light of day before.

But now some publishers appear to be bowing to the inevitable day when a polite question to a literary friend will not be 'what book are you reading?' but 'what book are you writing?'. Self-publishing will be the norm. And if an author hasn't already gained a good following for a self-published novel by his own efforts, a publisher won't be interested in the novel!


----------



## Dan (May 15, 2011)

John Yeoman said:


> Would I rather sell 1000 books at 99c or 10 at $20? An accountant would argue for the first option, but I'd rather have 10 quality readers who valued my book enough to pay a sensible price. Perhaps half of them will go on to buy my next book at $20 (or even a higher-priced information product at $100).



You'd take 1/5th the profit to have your book read only by "quality readers?" Really? Good luck with that. I'm not proud; I'll take anyone who wants to pay for it; it's not like their reading is going to drop the quality of my writing any. 

A lot of authors use the $.99 price (or even free) to attract readers to their work, then price future works higher (I've read that the consensus best pricing is $2.99). The $.99 tag is attractive...initially...but it's not going to keep a reader coming back to crap. I just read John Locke's debut novel _Lethal People_ at $.99. He prices all of his books at at the same price, and he made $126,000 profit...in _March_. Personally, I wouldn't drop another dollar on him, because the one I read was utterly ridiculous, but there's obviously a market for his work.

I'd like to put a price tag on the work I put into my novels, too. I think you're a bit naive to think that $20 for an electronic file by anyone but the most well-known authors is "reasonable." Let's just say that I can't envision a scenario where I'd even come close to charging that much for anything but a hardcover edition. Honestly, if I make enough to finance a few tanks of gas a month I'll be happy; I'm still going to write, regardless.

Is there crap writing out there? Hell, yes. But if you'd price yourself out of selling just to avoid some perceived kinship with bad writers, I don't know what to tell you. This is all just what I believe is best for me, though; your mileage may vary. 

dan


----------



## Candra H (May 15, 2011)

Guess it comes down to what value or worth you place on your writing and the effort you put into producing it.

I followed most of a very interesting thread about self versus traditional publishing over on Absolute Write and it goes for pages and pages. A lot of interesting stuff in there though, from both sides so if anyone wants a long read, here's a link to it - 

If you arent sure whether to self-publish, ask yourself what you want


----------



## Dan (May 15, 2011)

Candra H said:


> Guess it comes down to what value or worth you place on your writing and the effort you put into producing it.



In theory. In practice, the only thing that matters is the value that your potential audience places on it.

dan


----------



## John Yeoman (May 15, 2011)

I understand your argument, Dan. The point I was making is that, if you condition your reader to pay you 99c per book, you'll never move them off that price point. There's no profit to be made in selling one book to one reader at one time for 99c (rare examples to the contrary). The profit is to be found in making the reader comfortable at a reasonable price point - say, $4.99 for an ebook, capturing the customer's name, following up nicely and building a relationship. They may then feel comfortable investing $20 with you next time.

What do you sell at $20? Probably not fiction. But a non-fiction manual can be priced however you wish, provided the market values that information. And after $20? Shall we say $200+ per month for after-sales consultancy?


----------



## Candra H (May 15, 2011)

Dan said:


> In theory. In practice, the only thing that matters is the value that your potential audience places on it.
> 
> dan


 
So you're saying you'll only charge what you think "readers" are willing to pay, not what you feel is a good return for your hard work?


----------



## John Yeoman (May 15, 2011)

Candra H said:


> So you're saying you'll only charge what you think "readers" are willing to pay, not what you feel is a good return for your hard work?



If I get it right, those two things will be the same


----------



## Candra H (May 15, 2011)

I agree, because if the work isn't that good, people wont pay to read it.


----------



## Dan (May 15, 2011)

> So you're saying you'll only charge what you think "readers" are willing  to pay, not what you feel is a good return for your hard work?


Well, yeah. Anything else is shooting myself in the foot. The value of anything is ultimately determined by what someone else is willing to pay for it. 

I'm about to release my first novel, and I'm going to charge either $2.99 or $3.99 for it. Personally, I think that's a dang steal. Anywho, if I sell at that price point, awesome. If I don't, you bet I'll drop the price...especially because I have a lot more books in me. 80% of a buck is better than 0% of ten bucks.

John, I understand not wanting to condition readers at that price, but it can be a nice way to enter the market and get yourself known, too. Hey, crack dealers give it away free...at first. 

dan


----------



## SAPorcher (Jun 3, 2011)

What about self publishing after hiring a freelance editor to check it? I personally think self publishing is great, having personally done it more than once. I don't do it for the money so much as for myself. I agree that it's sad that professional sites are lowering their standards, but when a consumer purchases a self-published book, I think they know what they are getting into.


----------



## Ditch (Jun 3, 2011)

The self publishing entity that I used was Createspace, they set the price of the first book at $7.99. They set the price of the second at $8.99. I tried to set the price of the third at $8.99 but they set the minimum price at $11.73 on the third and would not publish it for less. A lot of people have only one book that they will ever publish and $7.99 is a tolerable threshold. But if an author submits two or more, they expect that this person is a prolific writer who will submit many more. They also expect that if a person buys the first book and likes it, they will also buy the second, the third and all that follow and will pay a higher price for it. Personally I think $11.73 is way too high for a paperback but they set the pricing. The ebook is priced at $8.99 for the third so this is reasonable.

There will always be rubbish out there even from well published authors. Clive Cussler was brilliant in "Inca Gold" but he has become so repetitive that his books are now all carbon copies of each other. He has a vast collection of antique cars that he has purchased with his book sales. In every new book, his hero is fighting some evil genius hell bent on world destruction or domination, an antique car that has been meticulously restored is destroyed in a car chase, the hero gets the beautiful woman and saves the world from destruction.


----------

