# Does online publication count?



## Grizzly (Mar 18, 2014)

I know everyone has a different standard of what it means to be a bona fide 'published writer.' Some only count works done in print, where the contest is open. Some only count being a published writer as having upwards of three works published by a legit company, agent and all. Some don't count self-published pieces.

I was wondering if being published online counts as being a published writer? Like by a lit mag, not a blog or anything.

What's your standard for being considered a published writer?


----------



## InstituteMan (Mar 18, 2014)

It counts for me.


----------



## A_Jones (Mar 18, 2014)

Online should count.  I dont know why it wouldn't.


----------



## Grizzly (Mar 19, 2014)

Is it weird that I don't personally count it as a publication?
A literary magazine just accepted a poem of mine for online publication, when I submitted it for the print version of the magazine. I don't mean to be a diva, but I'm thinking of emailing them and explaining the situation, and requesting the poem be reconsidered for the print version of the magazine. Is that a good or a bad idea?


----------



## Cran (Mar 19, 2014)

> Does online publication count?


Legally? Yes.
Culturally? Yes. 
Aesthetically? Jury's not in, but trending to Yes.
Personally? Only you can answer that.


----------



## Bilston Blue (Mar 19, 2014)

> I'm thinking of emailing them and explaining the situation, and requesting the poem be reconsidered for the print version of the magazine. Is that a good or a bad idea?



Why should an editor or editors change what they publish and where they publish it due to your ideas on what constitutes "actual" publication. Not a good idea to approach them with your thoughts. This doesn't mean you shouldn't withdraw your piece from consideration. 

But why cut off your nose to spite your face? Simply list the name of the establishment on your writing CV. Would Zadie Smith list on her CV: _Miss Adele Amongst the Corsets, _The Paris Review (print version), Spring 2014?

Of course she wouldn't, and neither do you need list that your piece is published only online. I'd say there's a decent chance, via assorted social media and the instant nature of all things web-based, that more people might read (or dip in and out of) an online literary magazine than actually subscribe to or buy their print versions.


----------



## stevesh (Mar 19, 2014)

I don't care where it's printed/displayed/posted. All I want to know is: were you paid for your efforts ? If so, you were published. If not, not.


----------



## A_Jones (Mar 19, 2014)

Getting published anywhere is good for a Query letter.  At the bottom where you make yourself look good, throw in that you have been published and where.


----------



## Terry D (Mar 19, 2014)

stevesh said:


> I don't care where it's printed/displayed/posted. All I want to know is: were you paid for your efforts ? If so, you were published. If not, not.



Pay is not a criteria for being published. It's the primary criteria for being considered a professional writer, but has nothing to do with being a published writer.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Mar 19, 2014)

I wouldn't automatically write off online journals as lesser in any way. Some of them have large audiences and are very selective, regardless of whether or not they pay. 

I would absolutely not write back and ask to be in the print publication. That's probably something they already considered anyway.

Congratulations on your publication, Grizzly.


----------



## dale (Mar 19, 2014)

Grizzly said:


> Is it weird that I don't personally count it as a publication?
> A literary magazine just accepted a poem of mine for online publication, when I submitted it for the print version of the magazine. I don't mean to be a diva, but I'm thinking of emailing them and explaining the situation, and requesting the poem be reconsidered for the print version of the magazine. Is that a good or a bad idea?



how many publishing credits do you have? and how well known is the literary magazine? when i 1st started out, i was jumping for joy at ANY credit.
as far as short stories, i have an online publishing credit that i'm prouder of than the print credits. that online one was read by more people. a lot more.
i kind of used to think like you do about the whole ordeal....but then i realized it's just because i'm 45 years old and prefer print as a matter of being
"old-fashioned". i'll take a decent online publishing credit any day of the week.....and there are quite a few strictly online publishers that have more 
prestige than many print ones.


----------



## stevesh (Mar 19, 2014)

Terry D said:


> Pay is not a criteria for being published. It's the primary criteria for being considered a professional writer, but has nothing to do with being a published writer.



I'll disagree. The line has to be drawn somewhere. If I print my latest opus and nail it to a telephone pole, am I 'published'? Seems to me that if what you've created is good enough that someone will pay for it, you're published. If not, I think you're just flattering yourself.


----------



## Terry D (Mar 19, 2014)

stevesh said:


> I'll disagree. The line has to be drawn somewhere. If I print my latest opus and nail it to a telephone pole, am I 'published'? Seems to me that if what you've created is good enough that someone will pay for it, you're published. If not, I think you're just flattering yourself.



Most publishers draw that line for us, and they say (by their refusal to accept previously published manuscripts) that it doesn't matter if you were paid for a piece or not. If it was 'published' anywhere, in print or on-line, it was published.


----------



## Bilston Blue (Mar 19, 2014)

I've had three short stories published in the past, and have another two awaiting publication in an anthology. I haven't been paid, nor will I for the two forthcoming pieces, but that doesn't mean I haven't/my stories haven't been published. Of course they have. Two online and one in print. I have a copy on my shelf. With my name beneath the title and everything. It counts as being published. What else is it if it isn't proof of publication? A story/article/essay will either be published or it won't; there is no place in between.


----------



## dale (Mar 19, 2014)

and i'd say this "pay for publication" has become even more obsolete with the online market the way it is. now there are so many
publishers with so many writers wanting to build credits on a resume, that even some decent publishers aren't willing to pay anymore.
it's went from a seller's market to a buyer's. i mean...it feels better to get that check in the mail...but it doesn't mean you're any more 
"published" than the non-paying publication. you're published either way.


----------



## MJ Preston (Mar 19, 2014)

stevesh said:


> I'll disagree. The line has to be drawn somewhere. If I print my latest opus and nail it to a telephone pole, am I 'published'? Seems to me that if what you've created is good enough that someone will pay for it, you're published. If not, I think you're just flattering yourself.



Interesting perspective. If a writer publishes on Kindle and sells a few books would you consider them published?


----------



## stevesh (Mar 19, 2014)

MJ Preston said:


> Interesting perspective. If a writer publishes on Kindle and sells a few books would you consider them published?



Yup. 

We're probably just arguing about the meaning of a word, which will often vary from person to person, but *Grizzly* asked for our personal opinions on what constituted publication, and that's mine. If others want to consider themselves 'published' when a story appears on some obscure emagazine or blog with a handful of readers, I guess that's fine, but my personal standard is, I think, higher. Most people here would read work that they wouldn't pay for, and if asked why, would reply that it wasn't 'good enough'. For those for whom that isn't the case, get in touch. I have a drawer full of crap I'd like to sell you.

There's a thread here or in one of the other writing forums I frequent wherein the OP described other writers in his genre as his 'competition' and was roundly criticized for doing so. I think he was exactly right. You have to be good enough to compete for a finite number of readers and the time they have to read for pleasure, and sales are the way the market keeps score.


----------



## MJ Preston (Mar 20, 2014)

stevesh said:


> Yup.
> 
> We're probably just arguing about the meaning of a word, which will often vary from person to person, but *Grizzly* asked for our personal opinions on what constituted publication, and that's mine. If others want to consider themselves 'published' when a story appears on some obscure emagazine or blog with a handful of readers, I guess that's fine, but my personal standard is, I think, higher. Most people here would read work that they wouldn't pay for, and if asked why, would reply that it wasn't 'good enough'. For those for whom that isn't the case, get in touch. I have a drawer full of crap I'd like to sell you.
> 
> There's a thread here or in one of the other writing forums I frequent wherein the OP described other writers in his genre as his 'competition' and was roundly criticized for doing so. I think he was exactly right. You have to be good enough to compete for a finite number of readers and the time they have to read for pleasure, and sales are the way the market keeps score.



In my opinion sales hardly merits keeping score on a writers ability. I would counter that there are 100's if not 1000's of talented published writers who are not even on the public radar simply because they are swimming in a sea of mediocrity and don't have access to costly promotion.

 In 2012 my book was rated by a reviewer from Publishers weekly as a solid horror novel, yet it yielded no more sales. It came in as a quarter finalist in the Amazon breakthrough awards, and still it is an uphill battle to get the word out. It has been picked up by a small publishing house for a second edition printing and I know I have a good book. I also know I have talent, but sometimes during the creation process I feel like its all just a big heaping pile of dung. 

As to other writers being your competition. Certainly, that's the market, everyone competes, I know enough writers who will not endorse the work of others for that very reason. I do not subscribe to such a philosophy. I'm published, I've sold books, but I've still got a day job. I'm 49 and don't expect to retire on the revenue generated by the stories I pound out on this keyboard. If I was in it for the money (not that I would turn any away) I would have become frustrated and given up many years ago. 

I write because that is what I was intended to do. It is my Mistress, or perhaps that is a bit rich. My crack whore.

Cheers
Mark


----------



## stevesh (Mar 21, 2014)

Fair enough. I guess my point was that the definition of 'published' is a movable beast. Any definition thereof will, by necessity, be arbitrary. I choose to draw that line at a single sale, and the OP asked for opinions. I would suggest that your 2012 book at one end, and the steaming pile of literary dung that is _50 Shades Of Grey_ at the other, are outliers. Some great books sell squat, and some awful books make millions. That fact doesn't negate my position.

The fact that you 'don't expect to retire on the revenue generated by the stories I pound out' suggests to me that you've given up on your talent in a commercial sense. I'm more than a decade older than you, and I haven't. I wonder what (other than a couple of good reviews) makes you think you're a good writer? In other words, what, other than sales, tells you you've been 'published' ?


----------



## MJ Preston (Mar 22, 2014)

stevesh said:


> Fair enough. I guess my point was that the definition of 'published' is a movable beast. Any definition thereof will, by necessity, be arbitrary. I choose to draw that line at a single sale, and the OP asked for opinions. I would suggest that your 2012 book at one end, and the steaming pile of literary dung that is _50 Shades Of Grey_ at the other, are outliers. Some great books sell squat, and some awful books make millions. That fact doesn't negate my position.



Yes, it is a movable beast, but it is also (at least for me) how you define it.



> The fact that you 'don't expect to retire on the revenue generated by the stories I pound out' suggests to me that you've given up on your talent in a commercial sense. I'm more than a decade older than you, and I haven't. I wonder what (other than a couple of good reviews) makes you think you're a good writer? In other words, what, other than sales, tells you you've been 'published' ?



I haven't given up on anything my friend. I consider writing as I consider any other art form, be it music or putting brush to canvas. I am at point in my life that if people are willing to take my hand at let me lead them down that rabbit hole that is enough. If I find commercial success in my writing that generates riches or even stability that would be a plus. Absolutely. 

But the money part of it is really just a fraction now. I do it because it's my passion.  I am hard at work on my latest novel, there are folks looking forward to it and that in itself is the payday for me.

Respectfully, I'll leave it at that.


----------

