The Oracle Series Part 3: The Future of Publishing…and Whiskey
Welcome back to the Oracle series. Sunday and Monday we explained the first two predictions Carlos and I shared in the Writer's Companion about where the publishing industry will be in ten years. For the entire list (so you can properly build your argument for or against our predictions) check out my guest post over in Rita's World .
Today, let's share bottle of Crown Royal while we look at predictions 3 and 4. Why whiskey? Because it's always a good conversation helper, right?
Prediction #3
E-publishers will only accept submissions through literary agents.
As in the past with paperback novels, traditional publishers will pass onto agents the onus of sifting through the trash because it makes economic sense to make the writer pay for the selection. Publishers eliminated a sizeable chunk of their staff by compelling writers to submit their work through an agent—and foot his wages.
Professional e-publishers will follow suit because it doesn't cost them anything and removes a considerable burden from their shoulders. Besides, literary agents have to live. Their role as critics and reviewers doesn't change because the format of the final buyer's product changes.
Personally I don't see this as a terrible thing. Quality control has to begin somewhere and why shouldn't agents have a piece of the electronic pie? Survival of the fittest, and all that fun stuff. There's sharks out there in Agent Land and I'd prefer having one of those looking after me and my interests, rather than fending for myself, thanks very much.
Prediction #4
E-books will be rated by an agency, as to their literary and editorial merits.
Again, this is logical and sensible. No, we don't mean literary agencies. We mean a separate agency built for just this purpose. Why? Through the argument about other forms of publishing, we have taken into consideration the writer, the publisher and other forces involved in the merchandising of books. But there is a most important and forgotten player: the reader. As a consumer, the reader will demand protection, and we wouldn't be surprised if our predicted rating agency comes imposed by circumstances. In the U.S., a country with such a zest for litigation, we're surprised no writer has been dragged through the courts and made to pay damages. A book is a product and a reader its consumer.
There comes a point when a book is so badly written as to be unreadable. An unreadable book is not a book. Extracting money for an object that doesn't fulfill its natural usability is fraud, misrepresentation or whatever the correct legal term is. We have spoken with many readers who bought a book and felt cheated because they couldn't read it.
Imagine buying a Whopper from Burger King, only to discover there's no meat in the bun. Most people would demand to receive their meat or have their money returned. Others would sue.
Just as most products have a stamp of approval certifying its usefulness to fulfill a given task, we think that something along these lines will be mandatory in self-published books. We don't mean a label rating the story, voice, style, plot, or characterization but a stamp certifying the book is written in accordance with current standards of grammar, syntax, and a limit on typo contents. This will be good news for all writers: the professional ones will see their work certified, and the others (without quality stamp) will have a level of protection against litigation since the reader will have purchased a product without that guarantee.
What do you think? If this happened, would it be good or bad for writers? Have I lost my mind completely to see this as a fantastic change? Please, share your thoughts. If you've got a rant, well you can share that too. Whiskey makes everything okay.
And come back to The Edge tomorrow to spend some time with Rita Webb, who will be here with Clive, discussing her journey to publication and the decision to self-publish. On Thursday we discuss Prediction #5 with me. What is it? Go on over to Rita's World and check it out.
date
newest »
newest »
I agree 100% that this should not be a government body of any kind. Man, what a mess that would be. A panel (or several panels) of "experts" like editors, publishers, even teachers :), would be perfect.Automation might be hilarious.I'm not sure if this will happen. It's a prediction that we see as a necessity that could prevent buying a truly shitty book, rather than something that is inevitable. I think somethig like this is the only way to ensure some kind of quality control in self published novels.
so if the book sucks, don't read it! There's trash out there now--books that have been published by "legitimate" publishers and are filled with mistakes, bad grammar, typos and are basically drek...these people who decide if something should be published or not--who the hell are they? Let the f...reader decide what to read...I think this is exactly why people are going for the self-publishing...maybe being able to "look inside" as Amazon does is a way to see something before you buy it...also e-books are cheap downloads aren't they? my husband has an I phone he reads them on...I've bought many books I wished I hadn't because I don't like the story or any other reason...you asked for a rant!
How does one know that it sucks though? Is there a way to know before buying? Sure the "Look inside" feature allows you a glimpse, but often, this "glimpse" can be cleaned up to entice the reader, and the rest of the book not given the same attention. I did not say that an agency would decide whether or not these books could be published, I said that the agency would confirm that yes, this book is complete, with little or no errors (like typos) and is properly formatted so that it is readable. And as for traditionally published books, yes some have typos. Agreed. But they're few and if one did a comparison of the number of sloppy books coming from traditional publishers to those coming from the self publishing industry, there would be far more coming from the latter.
A good writer who wants to rise above the slush would welcome such a change. Why? Because a good writer takes care of these issues so their book would get the seal of approval.
Yes, let the fucking reader decide. The problem is, eventually the reader will stop deciding altogether and then what? Without readers buying, we have nothing. This allows readers to make an informed decision. It might go something like this: Reader reads a blurb and the first five pages of two self published books. She likes them both but can only afford to buy one. So, because of this agency, she can look at the rating given to each. Book A has no typos and contains a full story with passable grammar and book B has a moderate amount of typos with a full story and grammatical errors throughout.
If the reader wants to buy the one with typos, she can. But she's buying it knowing what she's getting. As a reader, I love that idea. If you don't, sorry. It's not written in stone. It's something we see as inevitable as long as the self published shelves keep getting filled with crap.
Readers that don't care about typos or feel that the price is low enough that it doesn't matter that they hated the book, won't care if the seal is on there or not. They'll buy any book. Readers that do care, will only buy the books that are guaranteed to at least be readable.
I for one value every single dollar I spend. I don't care if the book only cost 99 cents. If it is a book I can't read because it was poorly edited or because it isn't even a complete story, then I'm going to be pissed off. that's 99 cents I could have spent on something worthwhile. If that happens several times, the total amount of money would anger me so much, I'd stop buying self published books completely. This is my point.
I don't see how a writer who works hard to edit and polish their book could be angered at this concept.
I think it is a good thing to have review information about a book. Anything that allows a consumer to make an informed decision is a good thing. There are groups that critique films, like Siskel and Ebert did in the 90's. There is the Better Business Bureau who critiques businesses. Many local newspapers write critiques on restaurants.But I'm wondering (1) how these groups will collect and read so many books and (2) how these groups will make money from performing this service.
Here's the thing, which we made clear in the Writer's Companion: These are not predictions we're claiming are absolutes. In other words, we're not saying that these things will occur and that's it. These are educated guesses on what will change within the publishing industry over the next ten years based on our research and experience. I for one haven't thought out how this would happen because it makes my brain hurt. I simply feel that it is something that is likely to happen. I see a need and the industry being what it is, I'm willing to bet someone will satisfy that need at some point. How it'll all work, your guess is as good as mine.
Personally, I'm not sure that money should be made. But I also know, nothing is free, so that's a good question, Rita. As for how they will collect and read, it "should" be optional. Self published or traditional author submits their book for rating, it gets a seal or doesn't. Those that choose not to submit simply don't get the extra backup saying that yes, this book is edited and polished enough to meets "these" requirements.
I don't think writers should have to pay for this seal of approval either, but we probably will.
Renee wrote: "How does one know that it sucks though? Is there a way to know before buying? Sure the "Look inside" feature allows you a glimpse, but often, this "glimpse" can be cleaned up to entice the reader, ..."I have worked VERY hard on my book--edited twice and gone through by me for typos etc at least 8times (Jim has also read it and caught a few)...another round will be coming up when I get it back in formatted edition..I was in a foul mood yesterday so maybe overreacted a bit to your post...I do agree that a weeding process isn't a bad idea, just wonder how it would all work and who might take on the task--maybe having a well-respected group of readers kind of like the michelin guide? or reviews by known authors in the same genre?
And a group (perhaps authors, although I suspect it'd be tough to find an unbiased group) would be able to weed your novel, which you worked hard to polish, from the 50 that didn't work hard and say to the reader "This book is polished and ready to read."
you are right about that...it is hard to put myself into a group that hasn't been weeded at all after everything I've done to make it as good as I can...maybe reviewers? there are a lot of them out there...
Yes, but reviewers can be biased and their reviewing is very subjective. I was thinking more along the lines of a technical review (typos, formatting, beginnning, middle, end, divided into a logical sequence using chapters, etc), not basing anything on personal taste. That's the only way to keep it unbiased, IMO.
One problem: if the agency were Government run, it would be a buraucratic nightmare, beset by political decisions as to what was acceptable, prone to bigot-led censorship, and it would take five years to get a decision out of them.
On the other hand, if the process were automated with e.g. spell checking, then we would continue to get the books where people use reigns to steer a horse and others would be at someone's beckoned call.