Rigging Bestseller Lists: Should Indies learn from this or demonize it...
Hi, everyone:
A friend of mine recently blogged about the spate of articles working their way around the news and blogosphere. I stumbled across one on The Verge called "How authors are buying their way to the top of the bestseller lists" by Carl Franzen. I'm not going to link to my friend's blog, because on this rare occasion she and I disagree, and I would never want to use our differing opinion as a point of discussion. Rather, I'd prefer to point out the issue itself.
In Carl Franzen's article, he points out that some well-to-do authors and many publishers often arrange large purchases of their books upon release. These purchases can happen through corporate contacts, other private parties, the authors themselves or even companies that specialize in getting books a position on the NY Times, Wall Street Journal or other popular bestseller lists. One such company "ResultSource" will accept payment to then go out and buy up books all around the country in whatever quantity they have determined will get that book on one or more particular bestseller lists. My friend pointed out that this is "cheating" or gaming the system, and she is of course right. However, when it comes to marketing there really aren't a lot of rules.
I think we indies are at a disadvantage specifically because we somehow imagine that publishing is different than any other industry. That we somehow imagine there is such a thing as fair in the world of marketing. For an author to be successful, she or he must first be noticed and then turn that notice into a ton of book sales. Big publishers and wealthy/connected authors, like John Locke, absolutely do have an advantage in that they can afford to use "self-purchases" to buy themselves notice via bestseller lists...but in the end they only make money if they can hold an audience.
I read a part of the original article a day or two ago, and it went on to say that many of these "purchased" bestseller spots go from thousands of copies one week to basically nothing the next. What that means is that many of those rigging the system are losing money doing it. Only those books that earn word-of-mouth sales actually go on to establish themselves in the long-term.
So, what I fail to understand is the outrage. Celebrities also rig the system with their name-recognition as do the subjects of news and crises stories. What about Aaron Ralston, the man who cut of his arm after being pinned by a boulder while hiking? He has book and movie deals stretching from now to the end of time. Chesley B. "Sully" Sullenberger is another prime example. He crash landed his US Airways Airbus A320-214 plane on the Hudson River, saving all 155 people on board. Though obviously not intentional, he became an instant celebrity with more book offers than most of us could ever dream of.
What I'm saying is that I think we automatically lose by assuming that any author launching pad is "cheating." Wouldn't it be much more constructive if we accepted that getting a large audience to notice us is part of our job? Wouldn't it be more advantageous for us if we chose to learn from all successful methods of getting that notice? Rather than demonizing those wins, maybe we should share ideas on how we could achieve the same thing with lower budgets and less connections. Of course, it is perfectly acceptable to earn our stripes, as most of us are currently doing, but I don't begrudge any author who has found a way to leap to the top by an alternative method.
Maybe we could all use a dose of "how can I replicate that" rather than "that is cheating." I have no doubt that some of us are good enough that if we found an alternative launching pad, our work would hold an audience thereafter. Of course, I absolutely respect alternative opinions.
'Hope the comments are helpful, even if only to secure the opposing point-of-view :-)
A friend of mine recently blogged about the spate of articles working their way around the news and blogosphere. I stumbled across one on The Verge called "How authors are buying their way to the top of the bestseller lists" by Carl Franzen. I'm not going to link to my friend's blog, because on this rare occasion she and I disagree, and I would never want to use our differing opinion as a point of discussion. Rather, I'd prefer to point out the issue itself.
In Carl Franzen's article, he points out that some well-to-do authors and many publishers often arrange large purchases of their books upon release. These purchases can happen through corporate contacts, other private parties, the authors themselves or even companies that specialize in getting books a position on the NY Times, Wall Street Journal or other popular bestseller lists. One such company "ResultSource" will accept payment to then go out and buy up books all around the country in whatever quantity they have determined will get that book on one or more particular bestseller lists. My friend pointed out that this is "cheating" or gaming the system, and she is of course right. However, when it comes to marketing there really aren't a lot of rules.
I think we indies are at a disadvantage specifically because we somehow imagine that publishing is different than any other industry. That we somehow imagine there is such a thing as fair in the world of marketing. For an author to be successful, she or he must first be noticed and then turn that notice into a ton of book sales. Big publishers and wealthy/connected authors, like John Locke, absolutely do have an advantage in that they can afford to use "self-purchases" to buy themselves notice via bestseller lists...but in the end they only make money if they can hold an audience.
I read a part of the original article a day or two ago, and it went on to say that many of these "purchased" bestseller spots go from thousands of copies one week to basically nothing the next. What that means is that many of those rigging the system are losing money doing it. Only those books that earn word-of-mouth sales actually go on to establish themselves in the long-term.
So, what I fail to understand is the outrage. Celebrities also rig the system with their name-recognition as do the subjects of news and crises stories. What about Aaron Ralston, the man who cut of his arm after being pinned by a boulder while hiking? He has book and movie deals stretching from now to the end of time. Chesley B. "Sully" Sullenberger is another prime example. He crash landed his US Airways Airbus A320-214 plane on the Hudson River, saving all 155 people on board. Though obviously not intentional, he became an instant celebrity with more book offers than most of us could ever dream of.
What I'm saying is that I think we automatically lose by assuming that any author launching pad is "cheating." Wouldn't it be much more constructive if we accepted that getting a large audience to notice us is part of our job? Wouldn't it be more advantageous for us if we chose to learn from all successful methods of getting that notice? Rather than demonizing those wins, maybe we should share ideas on how we could achieve the same thing with lower budgets and less connections. Of course, it is perfectly acceptable to earn our stripes, as most of us are currently doing, but I don't begrudge any author who has found a way to leap to the top by an alternative method.
Maybe we could all use a dose of "how can I replicate that" rather than "that is cheating." I have no doubt that some of us are good enough that if we found an alternative launching pad, our work would hold an audience thereafter. Of course, I absolutely respect alternative opinions.
'Hope the comments are helpful, even if only to secure the opposing point-of-view :-)
No comments have been added yet.
