Is Self-Publishing Prone To Producing Crap ?
Since I'm self-published, you might think my answer to the title question is a big, "No!".
Actually, I think self-publishing can produce some fine books right along with all the crap :-)
One thing I feel is desperately needed, now that self-publishing is becoming so popular, is a better way for readers to judge the quality of self-pubbed books. Reviews can help, a little, but are too easy to abuse. We need some new method of reader appraisal–any ideas??
I read an article a while back by an author associated with Writer's Digest: The "Self-Pub Is Crap" Debate, by Jane Friedman. She begins by stating two common viewpoints:
Most self-published work is crap. Anyone can "publish" their e-book and call themselves an author. None of these "books" are edited. It's a huge pile of crap that's just getting harder and harder to sift through. (God save us from the crap!)
Traditional publishing produces a lot of crap. Their standards are declining, and they don't even know what readers want. They are "out of touch" and unneeded gatekeepers.
I recommend reading the full article. She reaches a fairly solid conclusion :-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Our Comment Link Is At The Top of The Post :-)
Take Part In Our Reader Survey
Follow the "co-author" of Notes from An Alien, Sena Quaren:
On Facebook
On Twitter
AND, Get A Free Copy of Our Book
Tagged: Jane Friedman, publish, reader, reader opinions, self-published, self-publishing, traditional publishing, Writer's Digest
