On Changed Plans and Things That Trigger Them

I meant to apply my marketing class to the Kickstarter, but when I thought more about it, I realized I've already messed it up. Oh, well. There's always the next one.

I intentionally attempted to help fans by making my Kickstarter a way to get the Aleyi series for less with the pre-sale…and nibbles have been…pretty much non-existent. (Note to self: Holiday season crowdfund projects need a longer deadline, not a shorter one—and they probably aren't going to work until I have a larger fanbase.)

That's okay. I don't mind failing like that (and frankly, it might still succeed). If it doesn't, that's fine. It's not as if I'll be having to buy a cover for A Fistful of Water—although I'll probably revisit the filtering I do to the photo. I can't quite figure out how to get the effect I'm wanting.

And CreateSpace just made their "Expanded Distribution" free.

What does that mean?

"Expanded Distribution" (ED) refers to additional sales venues to which CreateSpace can make a self-publishing author's book available—including the CreateSpace Direct program, which lets bookstores and such buy your book at a wholesale price. ED used to cost $25…and any books sold through those vendors pays the author a lot less than the other sales venues.

Some self-publishing authors have avoided it due to the cost, and they're jumping on it now. Some have put their books in it as they could afford it and are snatching up the new free ED for new releases and for any old ones that didn't have it yet.

But some authors don't see ED as worth their while, either because of the pay cut or because of where they have to price their books to be able to put it in ED. These folks are generally fretting over keeping print prices "competitive"…compared to mass market paperbacks. (Note that CreateSpace produces trade paperback size books, not mass market paperback size. The mass market paperback size doesn't work with print on demand publishing; that size requires offset printing runs to be economical.)

Personally, I'm putting every book I can in ED. That's me. I don't know how many CreateSpace users are going to do that.

In other news, you might have noticed the widget on the right, where I'm doing NaNoWriMo. I've updated my "FIRST DRAFT PROGRESS" section in the sidebar there to show the things I hope to finish this month. So far, I've finally finished drafting the sequel to "Thrice Uncharmed", and I've discovered that the sequel to "The Nymph and the Goblin" is going to be longer than I originally thought it would be.

After I finish that, plan is to jump into my "How to Focus" guide and my book on writing essays efficiently. I suspect the sequels to the above sequels might weasel their way into that list, though.

In any event, December and probably January will be major revision months for me, so I can get those things to you. Maybe I can finish some of those short stories on the back burner as a break. Hmm. I'll still have First Draft Fridays to do, so… we'll see what happens. Especially since I'm moving in a few weeks.

But Lord willing, the next few months will be nice for fans who want more reading material by me. ^_^

Anyone else doing NaNoWriMo? What are y'all up to, this month?

—Misti

On Discoverability and Its Catch-22

First, if any of my many new followers over on Wattpad are over here, welcome!

Second, if you are here, mind letting me know how you found my story? Was it on the auto-recommend engine, in some other part of the site, on some 3rd party site…?

Asking because I've I was fairly steady at around 20 follows per day… and suddenly skyrocketed to 200 followers in one day and have now been getting a good 500 new followers on Wattpad per day for a solid week. And at least a few hundred readers, if my "read" stats are any indicator. (The story only has 9 "parts" on the site… And I've gotten over 200 new followers since I went to bed last night. O.O)

Now, I'm downright elated that so many people who enjoy my work are finding me. (And, as a reformed presbyterian, I'm thanking God for His Providence.) I'm admittedly a bit boggled by the abruptness and the volume—and I'm unsure how, precisely, they're finding me—but that's fine. I'll probably never know, and there's nothing wrong with that.

I didn't advertise anything. I can't find any linkbait mention of my Wattpad page or any such thing. (And I've checked with backlink search engines.) Therefore, I can only assume that Wattpad's internal referral engine has kicked in.

That in-site recommendation is a form of self-propagating word of mouth. That's the point that most authors want to hit for their websites or novels, whereever their works are located. That's why some authors desperately spam "Buy my novel! Buy my novel!" on social media—or, if they have the funds, buy a bunch of their own books—to kick their books' placement in the rankings so it can get noticed in a way that'll hopefully linger.

It's the Catch-22 of life. You have to be noticed to get noticed.

Just think of those authors, actors, and artists who suddenly get popularized in the media. Usually, those folks have been building their audience for far longer than even the general populace who's just discovered them gives them credit for.

For example, when the Dutch band Within Tempation had their first official release in the US, some folks scoffed that they were Evanescence knock-offs…even though that wasn't the case. Technically, Within Temptation was formed a year after Evanescence…but they were the first to release an album.

Within Temptation also had their first major hit—Mother Earth, released in 2000—a few years before Evanescence released Fallen. Those are, in my opinion the most similar albums between the two bands, so if anyone ripped off anyone, it would've been Evanescence. (But there are enough differences—and each band has enough relatives on its respective continents—that I suspect the sort-of concurrent development was coincidental.)

The sort-of comparable Finnish band Nightwish formed the same year Within Tempation did. They just were faster about getting albums out and getting on national charts before Within Temptation did. (And, as someone who listens to that genre of music, more folks seem to know who Nightwish is than who know who Within Temptation is.)

Each band had to be "discovered" in its respective country before its audience could grow to the point that it reached the other band's territories…which made people in those other countries wrongfully assume that the native band necessarily came first.

Er, I may be just a bit annoyed when people ridicule others using bad information that could easily be corrected with a basic glance at Wikipedia. ^_^

You have to be noticed to get noticed.

The same principle applies if you're seeking a promotion or raise at your job, actually. That means doing something worth getting noticed and, often, drawing attention to what you do. (I suspect that's part of why men tend to get higher pay than women. Men are more likely to say, "Hey, when do I get a raise?" Another reason would be the detail that women often have career interruptions in the form of childbearing and childrearing, meaning their priorities can be on negotiating schedule rather than money—but I'm meandering*.)

*I'm actually not ADD. I just have an ADD mother and ADHD brother, so I've grown up with ADD-style communication being normal and non-ADD-style being…abnormal. You could argue that my mind's actually been trained to jump topics. Speaking of which—pardon me a moment, my cat's giving the "Belly rub?" meow—and since she's asking politely, it's best to reward that. (An tap and a single lick on my arm, plus a "request" tone to the meow. Much preferable over when she gets ticked off at the other cat and will only accept attention from me, because she gets demanding and can bear a grudge for a week. To be fair, the other cat does give her reason to be ticked off.)

Okay. Back on topic…

The thing about discoverability… It can only happen if there's something to be discovered.

On Wattpad, I have a public, clearly announced posting schedule: at least one scene in a first draft, every Friday (although I admittedly missed one when ill). That gives people who like my writing a reason to follow me.

I also have multiple stories available on the site, which gives the readers who like my writing a sufficient taste of it to probably—hopefully—remember me well enough so they'll see my name and think "Ooo! New story!" rather than "Man, I wish I could remember who wrote that book I liked with the purple flame…"

My only non-Aleyi story on Wattpad right now is Thrice Uncharmed, because it was my first "First Draft Fridays" project. But it's been reduced to the blurb and a "What happened to this story?" page, because it's contracted to a small press and currently for sale on Amazon (e-book = $1.99).

Aleyi has always been my "Let's try this free fiction thing…" world. I suspect it isn't a coincidence that it also has the most sales, though my sales are also low enough that the in-site discoverability hasn't fully kicked in, so far as I can tell.

Interestingly, posting on Wattpad seems to have started helping sales after I began posting book #2. (Thanks if you've bought any copies of my work, by the way. And please don't feel bad if you haven't or can't. I intentionally participate in the "complete free fiction" style of marketing because I mostly grew up in the "Can't afford to buy even used books" bracket. That isn't hyperbole.)

But my current situation on Wattpad illustrates something about discoverability: You can't force it.

Oh, you can try to. You might even succeed for a time. But any attempts to game the system won't necessarily work…

And any discoverability you do earn won't necessarily last.

Some authors' response to that is to constantly be in promo mode, in the mode of "They can't buy it if they don't know it exists" and the rule of seven (which are true, but constant marketing isn't necessarily the only or most effective method to do so with the time input).

Some don't fret over it at all and focus on just getting the next book out, in the mode of "If you build it, they will come" (which isn't exactly true, but if you build your covers and blurbs and categories and keywords properly, search engines—vendors' and online—should enable your book to be found, though word of mouth will probably take time to build).

Personally, I dabble with some promo things—technically, the Wattpad thing is one—but I don't fret over it. And I recently had a short story in the KDP Select program for a 3-month stint, the success of which was debatable. (And the continuing influence of which seems to be non-existent, though I do have three reviews on that story…two by folks who obviously don't read the genre, so I have revamping the cover on my eventual to-do list.)

You could argue that I therefore have a foot in both worlds and am therefore shooting myself in both feet—not spending enough time on promo, not spending enough time on writing.

Well, I'm primarily a freelancer, so that's where the majority of my time goes: Taking care of clients. What I do after that depends on what mode I'm left in after taking care of them.

There is a reason I tend to play with cover design in batches. I find it something to do that provides some stimulation without requiring too much concentration. I find it, like sudoku, a pleasant way to unwind and get out of critical-editor mode when I'm having trouble pulling out of it. (Yes, I'm one of those people.)

Actually, I tend to do everything in batches. Read a novel—I'll read two or three in a day, or one every night for a few days, then none for a few. Experiment in the kitchen—I'll test three different recipes, make plans to improve them, then not get around to trying again for a few weeks. Write a story—I might write 3k words on a short story in my spare time on a day, then forget* about it for months. (*Okay, so I've not forgotten about that one yet, but considering it's a Wool fanfic and I need to read the rest of the series to finalize it, I probably will by the time I get to doing that.)

That's actually one reason I started the "First Draft Fridays" thing over on Wattpad. It forces me to actually work on a particular story until it's done—something I have far too little practice doing, because I was completely undisciplined for the first years I spent writing, starting maybe twenty stories for every one I finished. I'm still fighting the aftereffects of that bad habit.

But another reason I run those First Draft Fridays is discoverability. It gives me an update schedule for putting consistent content up there, in a form that encourages reader input. It's effectively a method of promotion that suits both Wattpad and me, intended to take advantage of the visibility boost I gained from being featured by the staff over there.

And, judging from my recent uptick in traffic on that site, it seems to be working—for Wattpad.

Will it last? Maybe, maybe not.

Will it lead to discoverability on other sites? Maybe, maybe not.

Even when time reveals the answer for my own work, that'll still be too small a sample size to judge if my experiences are consistent with or contrary to the norm—and the Internet changes so fast anyway that any adequate data compilation and analysis would probably be out of date about as soon as it was published, anyway.

Ergo, why I don't fret over it. (It helps to be Christian who believes God's the one who causes things to fall into place or not. Things always end up so much better when I'm relying on Him rather than on myself.)

Speaking of Christian fantasy writers, did you know Robin McKinley converted to Christianity? I just poked in her blog this week and found out because the post I read mentioned her recent conversion, which led me to track down the post wherein she actually talks about it.

What do you think of discoverability and its Catch-22? Do you think active marketing a necessity for the average person to be discovered?

—Misti

Plagiarism and Publishing

I've probably mentioned this before somewhere, but some things have happened lately that have made it come under discussion again: Plagiarism.

There are many types of plagiarism, but what's been getting chattered about lately is the type wherein folks steal chunks from different works, maybe paraphrase them, then put the results up for sale. (The collection method is called "content scraping", and the "convert to paraphrase" step is optional. There is a form of "content scraping" that isn't plagiarism, but the ethics of it are still questionable.)

Yes, even paraphrasing can result in plagiarism. See, there are three main ways to plagiarize:

1. Quote directly from a source in an improper manner, in violation of "fair use" (don't cite it, use too much, use it in an inappropriate setting, etc.)
2. Paraphrase a single source directly in an improper manner, in violation of "fair use" (don't cite it, use too much, use it in an inappropriate setting, etc.)
3. Use the source in such a manner that "fair use" does not apply (use exclusive information from a source without citing it, resell it without proper authorization, illegally repackage it without proper authorization, illegally redistribute it without proper authorization, etc.)

The definitions of what qualifies as "fair use" and "an improper manner" differs depending on if you're talking about novels, poetry, song lyrics, etc. For example, you can quote a favorite snippet from a novel—but from a song? Legal precedent is far more constricting*. The "without proper authorization" is a pertinent detail, because there's "PLR" (mainly in non-fiction) and some forms of the "creative commons" licenses that might allow such redistribution, repackaging, and/or resale.

*I am not a lawyer. This isn't legal advice. It's just one layman's understanding of what she's read. If you want to know if "fair use" applies to your situation, ask the appropriate type of attorney for your question.

On one hand, I know that a lot of schools somehow expect students to understand what plagiarism is without ever teaching them. (I changed schools pretty much every year, throughout my education. I also tutor and tend to get in education method discussions with professional teachers.)

So I, personally, have had a lot of exposure to folks uneducated or improperly educated about plagiarism. There have been several cases wherein a person gets a book deal—or an article assignment, or lauded by teachers, etc.—only for people to find out later that the item is plagiarized in some fashion. I've also had a (…few…) cases wherein someone stole an article I wrote and assumed it was okay because, well, it was online, and "Everyone knows online content is free." (That's incorrect, for the record—both in the "everyone knows" and the "online content is free" sense.)

So it's theoretically possible that some folks might do that paraphrase-and-resell form of plagiarism not realizing it's plagiarism and in violation of others' copyrights.

In fact, I'm sure somebody somewhere has done it on accident.

In this case, though, the "author" had several other layers involved (and, from what I've read, actually lifted the stories from FF.net—so the FF.net author plagiarized first, then the second person plagiarized the plagiarist). So I think it likely that the person knew precisely what he was doing.

So this is getting screen time on writers' blogs and forums, and a lot of people are freaking out or stunned in disbelief or shocked…

But, see, I've been seeing this same sort of thing happen for…as long as I've been on the Internet. Folks would content scrape articles or infoproducts, resell them on Clickbank or personal websites or other such websites. Folks would nab stories from sites like FP.com or FF.net and repost them on the same site, on similar sites, on vendor sites, on personal sites…

Something a lot of folks don't realize? It's been possible to easily sell e-books online for a good decade. The problem was drawing the audience, since the sites involved necessarily catered to specific niches that, yanno, knew what e-books and web stories even were and what to do with them.

The difference is that a broader spectrum of people are now aware of it.

And don't be mistaken—Amazon is keeping its eye out. There's only so much it can catch, though, and then it also has to be careful because sometimes folks have non-exclusive contracts that say two or six different people can publish the same thing. I've gotten "Hey, is this really yours?"** letters from Amazon for duplicate content.

**Okay, so that wasn't quite how it was phrased, but that was the implication.

The fact is, plagiarism happens.

When you're aware of it, you can act on it, but fretting over it will only hurt you. It's bad for your health and creativity.

Jami Gold's article on plagiarism has some good tips to minimize risk if you're worried about it, but… Personally? I'm unconvinced that it's worth worrying about. Register your copyrights and set up some Google Alerts. If you keep writing and publishing and build a fanbase, then readers will notice and tell you when you've been plagiarized.

That's how all the major plagiarism cases (that I can think of) have been caught, after all: a reader noticing and responding indignantly.

Not that I expect readers to watch out for plagiarism—I don't. I don't expect readers to point out typos they notice in my stories, either.

But…some readers will notice those things. If you're traditionally published, your hands are usually tied by your contract, whereas with self-publishing, you can act on it—whether it's plagiarism or typos. As long as a writer does their part to avoid either, trusting readers isn't lazy.

Now, if a writer expects readers to find plagiarists, to tell them about typos, to edit their book… That's another story entirely. (Sadly, that does happen, too.)

But no matter the precautions you take, if you publish your writing, you will likely be plagiarized—somewhere, someday. The plagiarism might be intentional, but it can also be accidental (so it's best to react politely, because the intentional ones will ignore you anyway). If it's worth reading, it's worth stealing.

So take a deep breath and be wary…but pick your battles. ^_^

Did you know you could plagiarize with paraphrases? What do you think of my attitude toward plagiarism? What's your attitude about accidental plagiarists vs. intentional ones?

—Misti

How the Wattpad Thing's Going

In case you don't know, Wattpad is a site for people to blog their stories…sort of. You can use it like that, or you can post things all at once for free samples and all.

Now, there are some downsides. You can't monetize or advertise your stories on Wattpad, though you can theoretically get permission to do so. They seem pretty reasonable about that kind of thing—for example, self-publishers post links to where you can find the story for sale, if you want it, as a matter of course, and they (as of this writing) don't mind.

How do I know they don't mind? A Fistful of Fire has been featured there since 5/30 (as I mentioned in my June news post). I don't know how Wattpad determines what to feature (other than I went to them with a complete work and blurb and asked "Hey, are you interested in featuring this?"). You can recommend titles to be featured.

Hmm… *wanders off to recommend a title…*

This is the weird thing about Wattpad: I can't find the blog post wherein I first heard about the possibility of getting featured. I also can't find the e-mails I received from Wattpad staff about it. (I've lost them before, and I remember being puzzled about why they didn't show up when I searched. This time around, I've searched [again] through my e-mail. No dice.) ((Watch them be right in front of my face, once I do find them again, eh?))

I know it was a mention on David Gaughran's blog post that brought it to my attention. This couldn't have been it, though, because I made my initial contact a few months before that. Judging from the dates, it could have been this post.

Which would explain the "It is?" responses I get when I say it's possible to recommend your own titles to be featured on Wattpad. Because nobody's posted a walkthrough, that I can find.

But in any event, A Fistful of Fire got featured there at the end of last month. I sought featuring with the goal of reaching readers, and that's working. I might hit 21k reads by the time I hit "Publish" on this post. (Admittedly, each "chapter" counts as a separate read, but there are only 10 sections on that title there. So once I account for those who stop partway through or who come back to re-read something, I've probably gotten over 2k reads in the past month.

Wattpad seems to reconsider their "featured" list every two weeks or so, at which point they might leave you there or bump you down or off. I actually moved up on the list. (Per one of my friends who's been watching the featured listing longer than I have, Amanda Hocking has been on there for months.)

I'm also using the site to host my "First Draft Fridays", wherein I post at least a scene in a specific WiP every Friday until the first draft is completed. That's succeeding, too.

So Wattpad's working great for me.

That said, I can't unequivically recommend it, because there are reasons to not blog your novel. It can also be difficult to build traction on the site, unless you can get featured or have a fan base elsewhere.

But as for me, I'm pleased with how things are going over there.

What do you think of Wattpad? Do you have a method you prefer for your own writing to reach readers, or for you (as a reader) to reach writers? Do you have any opinions to share on the way I'm using Wattpad?

—Misti

Pricing like a Business Person

This week, on one forum, someone opened a thread saying she'd raised the price for book 2 in her series, but book 2's sales went up and book 1's sales were tanking. She asked what to do to salvage book 1's sales—if she should drop book 2's price again.

Now, take a moment to think about that situation. Now that Product B has a higher price, Product B sells more copies than Product A, and Product A's sales are dropping (though it's priced lower). What should you do?

When I last looked in that thread, responses were "Drop Product B's price" or "Don't worry about it."

What puzzles me is that option #3—the one that makes the most sense, if the author's concerned about profit—was ignored: Raise the price on Product A. With Product B's increased sales at the higher price, perhaps the higher price made it compare better to similar titles.

To be fair, there are some different schools of thought on pricing, but creative types have a tendency to get ridiculous in how little they charge.

For example, I bought a scarf recently from someone. It was simple, and I could've easily made it myself, but I recognized the yarn. It would've cost at least $3 for the yarn alone—assuming the scarf only took one skein. (It might've been two or three.) It probably took about an hour to knit.

What did I pay? $15.

Why am I calling something "cheap", when the maker might've made $12 for an hour's work?

First off, self-employment taxes and health insurance. That $12 an hour ends up being closer to $8, which isn't much money, considering how hard knitting can be on the forearms and wrists.

Second, in my state and in that city, there are business licenses needed even to sell crafts. Artistic folks can get a special one that costs less than the regular one. (I guess the state knows how much being a hobbyist tends to net folks.)

Third, it would've cost around $40 to get that type of scarf, machine-made, from the store. So that scarf, including materials, cost less than half of what its comparable store product would've been.

Fourth, it was exactly what a particular friend of mine would like—a friend for whom I needed a birthday gift. The color, width, and length were perfect for her. I considered buying two, because another friend of mine (with the same birthday) loves the same color, but I realized she wouldn't wear a decorative scarf.

I would've paid more for that scarf.

In fact, I almost didn't buy it, because it was so cheap. I eyed it carefully, concerned that the maker wouldn't have taken the time to do the ends well.

Now, depending on how the lady who made the scarf wanted to target her products, she might only worry about the expense factors. However, if she wanted to, she could have also targeted her prices to attract buyers who definitely wanted her work, rather than who maybe wanted her work.

See, that's the problem with handicrafts: The up-front expense in time and money tends to be high, so you have to be a speed demon, make bulky items that don't take much time, or target folks who are after the handmade appeal. Fewer customers fall into that category than not, but you have to sell fewer products to make ends meet, too.

Writing is a bit odd—and nice—in that you can write a bunch, sell it for whatever you want, and then you can keep reselling that same thing and not worry about it. So it can be hard to see that the similar detail still applies.

That doesn't mean it's wrong to, for example, price a novel at $0.99. It isn't even wrong to price one at $18. The latter price… Well, evidently the publisher's trying to milk that bestseller name to get the maximum revenue possible from the "true" fans who'll buy whatever Rowling writes. The former price targets bargain shoppers who are after cheap, which tends to be a different audience from folks who buy at $3.99, which can be a different audience from folks who buy at $6.99.

Different audience.

Different customers.

So if raising a price (or lowering it) makes one of your products sell better, then perhaps your target readership tends to hang out in a different price zone.

But to assume that an option—of raising or lowering a price—is always the best thing to do, in every scenario…ignores how varied customer bases are.

Is there something that you would've bought at a higher price? What about something you almost didn't buy because you thought the price suspicious? Or something you would've bought, but you thought its price ridiculous?

—Misti

Why I'm Not a Hater of the Kindle Select Program

Exclusivity of product has always been used in retail. A manufacturer might like it to increase panache (or to limit the number of distributors it has to deal with, for an in-demand item). A retailer might like it because it means customers have to come to them and not the business down the street for that particular product.

A (sometimes) temporary exclusivity of format has been standard in publishing (at least for the past two decades, and a time delay between the release of two different formats is also normal.

Yep, I just used the n-word.

Granted, a lot in the world of publishing seems dysfunctional and completely contrary to good business sense to this chick who's been following publishing and agents for the past decade and scratching her head. (Then again, I did have a former coworker once tell me that I expected business to make sense—but I digress.)

Remember waiting six months or a year for that book you wanted to come out in paperback instead of hardback? (Assuming that it came out in paperback.) Remember waiting for the e-book version to come out for that novel you wanted to read, while praying that the e-book would be in a file format you could actually use—assuming an e-book came out at all?

Do you remember?

*taps fingers on her desk, waiting for answer*

(Come on, folks. I surely can't be the only one who remembers this.)

The problem, as I see it, is how a lot of self-published authors are treating Kindle Select. They cheerfully take their books down from retailers where they "hardly sell," no warning to fans. Effectually giving those users of non-Kindles the finger.

Personally, I was a bit irritated because I just got a NOOK Touch. I'd just discovered (by word of mouth) that I'd probably like a particular person's books, and she went and took them off Smashwords before I could buy them. Fortunately for her, we're both somewhat active members on the same online forum, so I'll have plenty of exposure to her signature to remind me that I was interested in her books, once (if?) she removes the exclusivity.

But that's the method of the exclusivity that irritated me, not the exclusivity itself.

If an author handles exclusivity properly—announcing it, making it temporary, and presenting it that way (Hey, you can get my book on Kindle right now for X price, and after Y date, you'll be able to find it on Smashwords and other retailers)—then it's just a matter of focusing on one element at a time. Even my own stories are exclusively in e-format at this time, not print. (Extended illness and an MRI sorta sucked up all my funds, last year—emergency fund, computer fund, savings… No, that's not a whine. I'm just pointing out that life happens to all of us.)

Kindle Select actually has a lot to recommend it. It's a temporary program, only 90 days of exclusivity. Sure, there's "automatic re-enrollment," but you can easily disable that the very day you sign up. Easily set 5 days of your choice free with a handy little calendar. Each enrolled book that's borrowed gets a piece of the borrowing fund.

I can actually see myself using this program, in the future—for a single 90-day stint, for a new title that you readers aren't waiting on.

Yes, I use a NOOK. Yes, I'd be irritated if I were waiting on a book in the format I'd bought the prequel in, and it weren't available. What am I thinking?

I'm thinking that I will not place the 4 Chronicles of Marsdenfel stories in any e-retailer exclusivity program. Nor will do so for at least the next two books in the Destiny Walker series. (There's a reason that I'm placing a caveat on two, the reasons for which will be made clear as I write the series.)

But I'm also thinking that if my Kindle readers get temporarily exclusive content, I'd like to have other temporarily exclusive content available to my other readers.

After all, fair's fair. :)

Do you think the Kindle Select Program's exclusivity clause compares to the wait for alternate forms of traditionally published books being available? Why or why not?

2 Types of Editors in This World

If you've ever started poking into online information about editing, you've likely discovered that the job descriptions for editor are myriad, and they differ from situation to situation. Some make sure all the content lines up and the plot works; some ensure that all the commas are in the right places. Some verify your data, while others make sure you're suitable for publication.

But when you get right down to it, there are only 2 types of editors:

1. "Big-picture" editors who focus more on the forest than on the trees.
2. "Little-picture" editors who focus more on the trees than on the forest.

Content editors, for example, are the first type. This is also the type of feedback you usually want from a beta reader. Does this plot work?

Line editors, copyeditors, and proofreaders are the second type. The technical aspects are their forte. Are my mechanics right?

A good editor of any type will have crossover in what they see, like a copyeditor who catches that your villain speaks like the heroine in one scene. That's a detail catch, but it's based on the big-picture analysis of who your characters are. The content editor who says you should study dialogue tags is catching a little-picture issue.

But every type of editing is skewed towards the forest or the trees. The skew might be slight, but it'll be there.

Acquisitions editors, for example. Acquisitions editors often don't edit at all but just make executive decisions about acquisition. They can lean either way. Both sides of editing will usually be important to them, because they're trying to find a piece to accept. They ideally want to find something that'll fit their publication or company as-is.

But what if an acquisitions editor needs a piece, nothing in the slush pile is ideal, and the choice is down to two pieces? One that's a little weak on the plot (forest) but that she couldn't put down for the beautiful prose and grammar (trees), and another that's missing a comma or two (trees) but that she couldn't put down for the compelling story (forest)?

Some acquisitions editors will prefer one, some the other. That's to be expected.

Because editors aren't the only ones like this. Some folks enjoy a movie or a story as a whole, while others enjoy them for the details.

Consider your average book review that's left on Amazon, which answers "Did you enjoy this story?"

A big-picture answer could be "I loved how Joe Blue always made lemonade from his lemons!" or "Suzie Maye was so annoying, but I couldn't help but love her anyway!"

A little-picture answer might be "I loved the poem headings to every chapter" or "That scene where Joe had to fish Suzie Maye from the semi filled with whipped cream made me cry!"

Neither type of enjoyment is better than the other. They're examples of how we're all different.

It probably doesn't surprise any of you to know that I (a proofreader/copyeditor) am a "tree" person. Sudoku's a breeze for me, and checkers isn't too hard, but chess? Eeek. So much to keep track of and analyze! (Interestingly enough, as I've gotten better at analyzing the "big picture" for stories and my own writing, I've gotten better at chess, too.)

What about you? Do you tend to analyze and enjoy things on a "little-picture" level or a "big-picture" level?

—Misti

Editing Ability, Muphry's Law, and the Overconfidence Effect

Okay, for two weeks now, I've been addressing self-editing. First, I asked "Is Self-Editing Unprofessional?"; then I asked "Must Writers Be Professional?".

I admit that I hadn't heard of Muphry's [sic] Law before I went searching on Wikipedia for the name of the concept I'm actually wanting to bring up, but this one also works.

Muphry's Law

"if you write anything criticizing editing or proofreading, there will be a fault of some kind in what you have written"

Source: Wikipedia

Nobody's perfect. For everything, there's a point where you have to say "It's good enough" and let it go.

But is that thing actually good enough for general consumption?

I noticed something, even as a teenager when I was hanging out on fan fiction sites (…and learning how to balance critique with praise).

As a general rule, the more confident someone was about her writing, the more her writing sucked. (Saying "her" because so many fanfic writers are female.)

The less confident someone was about her writing, the better it tended to be—until it plateaued at a point where someone was fairly confident that they could put a sentence together without being convinced that "My writing is the bestest thing evah!" Those coolheaded ones were the fantastic ones, mind you, but they didn't realize that or even believe it of themselves.

The tendency to overstate your ability in a subject has actually been researched. I thought there was some "law" about it, but what I'm finding is the term "overconfidence effect."

Overconfidence Effect

The less you know about a subject, the less you assume there is to know, and the more you overestimate your knowledge of that subject

Source: Wikipedia

So let's try a quick quiz to test if you might be able to self-edit your own work. Answer honestly, now.

1. You know everything there is to know, everything you need to know, and everything you should know about editing.
2. You know a little, but you know that there are many things still need to learn.
3. You know some, but you're not sure you know everything you should.
4. You know a fair bit, though you're sure you don't know everything.
5. You know a lot. You're sure it isn't everything, but you know where to look things up.

Now let's rate your score:

• If you answered 1: forget it. You have a long way to go before being able to edit your own work—and event that can't start until you have an attitude change.
• If you answered 2: keep heart. You have a way to go, but you're on the right track!
• If you answered 3: keep at it. You're getting there…
• If you answered 4: try it out. You might be ready; at any rate, practice will do you the most good, now.
• If you answered 5: get to it. You're a good candidate for self-editing; at worst, you'll clean up your strong points to make it easier for someone else to identify your weak points.

I'm not going to gracefully bow out of this one. I'm an editor for my "day job", so of course I consider myself a 5. But in my own writing, my weakest points are transitions and plotting. I brain functions in odd, transition-less ways that loses folks who know me well, so I have to focus to make sure I connect the dots. I can also produce individual characters, situations, and scenes that make a pre-reader plea for more, but stringing them together into a plot? That's harder for me. (That's part of why I have so many WiPs—some are only characters and situations, right now; no plots.)

Even in day-to-day life, I have a tendency to think too hard. That's part of why I've been making myself write so many short stories; they're making me focus on Ockham's Razor, to produce plots that fit in about 3k words.

Might you be an exception to the above rules of thumb? Possibly. But I can't think of one exception that I've ever encountered in more than 5 years of working professionally—if you count my time as a hobbyist, we're entering two-digit territory—so forgive me for being dubious.

Now that you have some idea of if you're a good candidate for self-editing or not, this series will continue, addressing issues like the different types of editing and tricks to help yourself see what's actually on the page instead of what you thought you wrote.

How'd you score on the quiz? What are your thoughts on Muphry's Law and the Overconfidence Effect?

—Misti

Happy Thanksgiving, fellow USians!

Must Writers Be Professional?

As a recap from my post last week, let's look back at Merriam-Webster for a some pertinent definitions (according to the unabridged online dictionary):

professional

participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs (definition 2a)

professionalism

the conduct, aims, or qualities that characterize or mark a profession or a professional person" (definition 1a)

Ergo, if you're seeking financial return from your writing, you're a professional. If you're not seeking financial return, you're not.

Notice that there's no time limiter in there. Someone who has a plan for financial return in the long run despite a plan for no financial return in the short term would still count as a professional.

But must writers be professionals?

In self-publishing, in freelance writing, there's a common attitude that you must be professional, else you shouldn't be writing.

Funny. It was my dabbling (for fun) as a teenager that gave me the skills to be what I am now: author, proofreader, tutor, etc. I didn't even know freelancing existed at the time, but I unprofessionally wrote articles to help friends, critiqued their papers (and they mine), and proofread everything I saw or heard. (There's a reason my mother adds "Do NOT proofread this!" to notes she leaves around the house for me.)

I would spend hours teaching basic grammar to fellow fan fiction writers. Some of you readers even know me from way back when. I remember reading comments on someone's story, to see someone respond to my comment: "Oh, don't mind her; she's rude and a little mean." I remember the time I spent a good hour per (short) chapter, critiquing someone's story per that author's request, and the author having to defend me publicly when her other readers came after me.

Any hobby has its dabblers. The artist who takes a year to make a painting for a friend. The sculptor who produces clay objects now and again when she wants them. The knitter who makes toys to give away. The poet who only bothers to write poetry if she forgets to buy a card for a friend's wedding. (Only those last two are me.)

Okay, so others might tell such creative folks that they should sell their work, but if they don't want to, nobody will flip out and ask them why they even bother with their hobby.

Whereas a writer who insists on being "unprofessional" and giving their work away for free gets insulted and pressured to stop writing.

Why?

Okay, so I suspect I know why. Writers are generally under-appreciated and underpaid. Look at how often writers are pressured to accept "exposure" as appropriate payment for something. (Dude, if I want exposure instead of payment, I'll make that call, thanks.) Newbie freelance writers, seeking work online, are often pressured to take paltry amounts of a few cents per word—

And I bet that paltry amount, offered to freelance writers, stems from fiction markets. See, magazines and e-zines are deemed as "pro" 'zines if they pay a minimum of 5¢ per word for fiction. A would-be freelancer (or someone looking to hire freelancers) might see that, not realize the distinctions between fiction and nonfiction—or between FNASR and "all rights"—and therefore offer something that seems reasonable to them… with it actually being a fraction of standard freelance rates.

Many types of freelancers give up all rights to what they produce. Add a "0" to the end of what's generally offered for fiction, and you'll be closer to hitting a standard freelance rate.

That difficulty many writers have finding respect and appropriate payment probably makes them a wee sensitive when someone waltzes in and says, "I don't care about the money! I just want to be read!"

You know, there are music artists who offer their music free, too, as downloads or just for streaming online. Maybe it's just where I hang out online, but I haven't heard anyone accusing such artists of devaluing music.

Not everyone's trying to write for their "day job", just like not everyone's trying to paint or sculpt or knit or sing as a job. They might do it for fun and share it for fun.

So no, I don't think writers must be professional, whether they write fiction or non-fiction.

What's your take?

—Misti

Is Self-Editing Unprofessional?

There are two main schools of thought in self-editing:

1. Nobody can adequately edit themselves.
2. Everybody can (learn to) adequately edit themselves.

My "day job" is as a freelancer. I proofread, write, edit, and write—for small businesses, with small businesses, for individual entrepreneurs and self-publishers, etc.… My first freelance job ever as an 18-year-old college chick was writing online articles, and I was expected—required—to adequately edit my own work. But as an editor for self-publishers, I'm expected to insist that everyone needs an editor.

I can't be the only one who sees the inconsistency there.

Business writers, students writing term papers and test essays, professionals writing their own e-mails—all of them must edit and proofread their own work. Okay, in some cases, editing can be outsourced, but on a test essay? My best essay grade in college was one where I was given the topic and had an hour time limit to produce that essay. My teacher gave me a 99% and later apologized for not giving me 100%, because she hadn't found any errors and the essay still resounded with her.

(Anyone thinking "But wait! Freelancers go through editors, too!" Yeah, for some types of writing, but in my experience, those are acquisitions editors; their job is to make sure you nail the tone and angle that the publication wants, not to play English teacher for you. And I know of one university that doesn't allow undergraduate students to get help beyond "You have comma splices in your paper.")

Self-publishers, though, are often told that they're being "unprofessional" if they don't hire editors and proofreaders for their manuscript. While I agree that most writers need or can benefit from a good editor, and a proofreader's often a good idea, I disagree that hiring an editor makes someone professional.

Hiring an editor doesn't do you diddly squat if you don't understand what that editor's supposed to be doing—and if your editor doesn't actually do her job. (Saying "her" because so many of us are female.)

A (near-)"flawless" manuscript isn't what makes you a "professional," either.

Look at Amanda Hocking. She's a nice girl, polite and treating her writing like the business it is. But all the editors she hired—and there were more than one—evidently didn't catch something in her My Blood Approves series that struck me as a large plot hole, which probably could've been fixed with little tweaks. (I still read all four and don't mind recommending them to people who enjoy that kind of paranormal romance.) Am I to consider her "unprofessional" because her works aren't "flawless"?

Look at Dean Wesley Smith and Kristine Kathryn Rusch, pro writers who probably have more stories under each penname than I have ideas. They know what they want to do with their writing, and they're more concerned about getting quality stories out there in enjoyable form than flawless form. Rusch has been an award-winning short story editor. Am I to consider these two "unprofessional" because they don't even aim for technically "flawless" stories?

Merriam-Webster is the dictionary of choice in US publishing, in my experience. The pertinent definition of professional (2a) is "participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs" (according to the unabridged online dictionary).

Professionalism is "the conduct, aims, or qualities that characterize or mark a profession or a professional person" (same source, definition 1a). So it's how you behave and what you want out of your chosen profession.

That makes "professional" a matter of attitude, an attitude of seeking financial return from your chosen profession. (You don't have to be "professional" and seek financial return from your writing if you don't want to—but I'll get more into that in a later post.)

A professional freelance writer, one who wants to make money at writing, must self-edit and self-proofread to get assignments, unless they seek clueless clients. (I'm sure this happens, and I feel sorry for the deluded clients.)

A professional author, on the other hand, can hire a pro editor or self-edit, depending on what they need. I find many more typos in, for example, work by another author I like who's a NYT bestseller and gets edited and proofread by one of the so-called "Big 6", then particular self-publishing authors I enjoy, some of whom I know don't hire out.

Now, notice that I'm not saying "You must self-edit your story" or "You must hire a pro editor."

I'm saying your choice on whether to self-edit or hire out editing does not have any bearing on being a professional author.

(Yes, I intend to return to the topic of self-editing next week.)

What are your thoughts on (self-)editing and professionalism?

—Misti

5 Reasons Every Indie Author Should Attempt Cover Design

Every self-published author should try to make their own e-book covers.

Note that I did include try in that sentence. You may not end up using the cover. In fact, you probably don't want to use your first several tries. I've been doodling with cover design for a few NaNoWriMos, now, and while I still think that one of those is good, the rest…

Well, there's a reason I make myself fight with Gimp (a free Photoshop alternative) once a week. I'm learning. Slowly, but I'm learning.

Some authors outsource all covers because they can afford it, or because they want hand-painted covers and have a graphic designer friend. That's fantastic! I'm glad for you—

But you should still try designing your own covers, sometimes.

My reasons for saying that are fivefold:

1. It will help you better appreciate what goes into making a nice one.
2. You might discover that you actually like doing it.
3. Making a cover mock-up (for a "stuck" story) can help your subconscious figure out how to get the story finished.
4. The more you practice, the more you'll improve.
5. You'll develop a better eye for what makes a good book cover—which will help you figure out who to hire.

In keeping an eye on others' opinions of book cover creation and making my own, I'm learning about what makes a book cover work, on a technical level. One factor is that it must catch the eye; another is that it must be legible.

My short story "Romeo & Jillian" has had three covers: the one I originally planned for it, and then the two I've actually used. One I bought from Dara England's clearance section. The other I made.

Here are the 3 covers. I did something silly on the two I made myself—but a silly thing that's actually common once you think to look for it. Can you see what I did wrong?

—Misti

*ETA: Added link to Gimp. Fixed a typo. Clarified ending question.