A Policy Created by Arsehats
I've just learned that if you attempt to contact somebody outside of your social circle, the following message appears at the top:
"Note to authors: We don’t recommend contacting users to promote your book or request reviews. Nearly all of our members consider unsolicited messages from authors or their representatives to be spam, and sending such messages may result in your account being flagged."
This is actually incredible: a social media site which discourages people from contacting each other.
For the record the OED defines spam as "irrelevant or unsolicited messages sent over the Internet, typically to large numbers of users, for the purposes of advertising, phishing, spreading malware, etc."
So what's the reality? I'm presuming either a good number of authors are taking the spam approach and it's pissed a lot of people off or many users don't quite understand the definition of spam. There could be another explanation, but those seem to be the most likely. If I had to take a guess I'd imagine it's a bit of both.
I don't know about other authors on here, but the only way I can get my books read is either through joining forums and hoping for the best or by contacting people on Goodreads. Since joining October of last year I've contacted approximately one person per month, offering them a free digital copy for review purposes. Every single time I've wrote a hand-written message explaining exactly why I've chosen to contact them personally so they know it's not thoughtless spam. I normally refer to the fact that they read similar books or something else about their profile indicates that they'll probably appreciate what I'm doing. Every one of them can now be found on my buddies list.
This is because what I did isn't spam; it's what skint authors do in order to get their shit out there to the people who are looking for it.
In my view authors who spam their lives away by copy and pasting 'buy my shit' fifty times a day into a message box have fucked it up for the rest of us. Similarly those users who've reported authors for sending messages rather than simply ignoring them have also contributed to the forming of a particularly shit policy.
But what's really interesting is the anti-author sentiments of the above message. There's no warning to readers, asking them not to contact authors for free copies of their books for review purposes. Why is this? Well right now there's an argument to say that Goodreads believes that authors are second class citizens.
For the record; I don't advocate the use of any messages deterring people from contacting each other. Authors should be free to reach out to readers; readers should also be free to help authors out. It's what this community needs to thrive.
So let me know your thoughts, readers and authors, because right now I'm a bit miffed.
Inabit
R.D
P.s Buy my shit and win a free hashtag with your name next to it. All Dreyfus merchandise available exclusively from suckyourmum.com.
"Note to authors: We don’t recommend contacting users to promote your book or request reviews. Nearly all of our members consider unsolicited messages from authors or their representatives to be spam, and sending such messages may result in your account being flagged."
This is actually incredible: a social media site which discourages people from contacting each other.
For the record the OED defines spam as "irrelevant or unsolicited messages sent over the Internet, typically to large numbers of users, for the purposes of advertising, phishing, spreading malware, etc."
So what's the reality? I'm presuming either a good number of authors are taking the spam approach and it's pissed a lot of people off or many users don't quite understand the definition of spam. There could be another explanation, but those seem to be the most likely. If I had to take a guess I'd imagine it's a bit of both.
I don't know about other authors on here, but the only way I can get my books read is either through joining forums and hoping for the best or by contacting people on Goodreads. Since joining October of last year I've contacted approximately one person per month, offering them a free digital copy for review purposes. Every single time I've wrote a hand-written message explaining exactly why I've chosen to contact them personally so they know it's not thoughtless spam. I normally refer to the fact that they read similar books or something else about their profile indicates that they'll probably appreciate what I'm doing. Every one of them can now be found on my buddies list.
This is because what I did isn't spam; it's what skint authors do in order to get their shit out there to the people who are looking for it.
In my view authors who spam their lives away by copy and pasting 'buy my shit' fifty times a day into a message box have fucked it up for the rest of us. Similarly those users who've reported authors for sending messages rather than simply ignoring them have also contributed to the forming of a particularly shit policy.
But what's really interesting is the anti-author sentiments of the above message. There's no warning to readers, asking them not to contact authors for free copies of their books for review purposes. Why is this? Well right now there's an argument to say that Goodreads believes that authors are second class citizens.
For the record; I don't advocate the use of any messages deterring people from contacting each other. Authors should be free to reach out to readers; readers should also be free to help authors out. It's what this community needs to thrive.
So let me know your thoughts, readers and authors, because right now I'm a bit miffed.
Inabit
R.D
P.s Buy my shit and win a free hashtag with your name next to it. All Dreyfus merchandise available exclusively from suckyourmum.com.
date
newest »
newest »
I saw this today and my heart did sink a bit, just starting out on the minefield of judging what is acceptable practice for an author or not as I am. I think a side-effect of this is that reviewers may become more active in seeking out the books that they want to review as they may see a sharp decrease in the number of authors seeking their services in this way. Hard to know if the warning will have any effect or not but it has obviously been spurred by a more interventionist stance from Goodreads. I suspect us authors are going to have to get incredibly creative at circumventing any restrictions that may be on the horizon. Codewords maybe? Smoke signals between author and potential reviewer? I've been doing tedious online promotion things on and off all day so my brain has run out of things to say about this. :(
Would it help if potential reviews were to wink at you?
This is an irritating policy and I can understand your feelings. But I think it's arisen from the behaviour of, as you say, a minority of authors (but not a small minority, unfortunately) who generate more spam than a wartime sandwich factory. This means us scribblers have to be careful. A cautionary tale: One author wrote to a Goodreads "top reviewer" asking her to review her book, and the reviewer decided this was spam and reacted very spitefully, leaving a one-star "review" of the book (which she had not read); a number of her followers did the same. I was sufficiently annoyed to buy the book and see if it was good enough to review. It was, with honours. I gave it five stars. (It's Almaty-Transit by Dana Mazur.) But it still has a star rating of under 3 because of this incident. In this case my sympathy is very much with the author, and in your case I imagine you wouldn't send out loads of spam. But I'd be very careful.
There are various lists around of book bloggers, many of whom upload their reviews here and to Amazon as well as to their blogs. I went through a couple of these, looked at the blogs and checked their submissions policy (if you can't see it, it's often under "Contact me"). That will tell you whether they're accepting review proposals and in what form they should be. I then followed their instructions. Eight or nine did agree to review one of my books and four or five actually have. Another tactic is to use NetGalley, though it is expensive (and did not work that well for me). I also post on my public Facebook page, on Google+ and Twitter to say that review copies are available.
Actually yes Paul, Goodreads allows users to do that with notifications, so it is hard to see why they couldn't set their preferences to receive messages only from those they know, or those they follow, or all users if they are happy with that; or even to block authors.
I've been thinking about this and because I don't care about rules and etiquette, I'm carrying on as normal...
Since I saw the message on Sunday, I haven't felt that rejected since the train conductor closed the doors on my face this morning and said something in Norwegian at me while the doors closed- whatever it was was unnecessary!I doubt Goodreads are very happy with the message either. But I don't think I'd like to know about the underhand stuff self-pubbers are doing on this site. The tricks I'm sure are unimaginable:
http://groupthink.kinja.com/richard-b... (I of course can't afford wine in Oslo.)
On that competition where I posted the horror story, I get updates from the organisers saying that they get numerous paranoid messages about authors "gaming the star-rating system" and so on. What with the gates completely open to the publishing of any and all material, "author" has become a title extended to any fruitcake with a laptop, and as fellow self-pubbers, this fact becomes a caveat of our business model. We've been lumped into the same category out of urgency.
My experience with sharing books as I mentioned before was 65% nothing, 34% positive, 1% cease and desist.
I don't angrily protest job offers I receive on LinkedIn or RT requests on Twitter. If someone suggests something to me that they perceive is to our mutual benefit, I'm happy to be thought of.
Paul wrote: "My technique of a link or so a day on twitter with my eyes shut seems to be the best I’ve come up with."Great tip! I will use this. I can also report that with this technique I've coined called "drunk marketing", I've achieved near-American levels of confidence.
Drunk marketing is the most effective, Leo. I do it every night...That story you linked us to is unbelievable. Judging from the backlash; it's the end of his career. He's got more one star reviews than Iain Duncan Smith over on Amazon which is a remarkable achievement. The only other way to achieve this is by wiping your arse on some paper sheets, stapling them together, calling your creation 'Total Fucking Shit' and then putting it out there for sale.
I don't really bother with Twitter as a marketing tool these days because I'm surrounded by authors who Tweet out annoying book adverts all day long and most of them are now on mute. You'll probably know who I mean because it's the same faces trying to relentlessly push their stuff. Because I ignore it, I'm presuming most other users do.
I have, however, contacted a few people through direct message on Twitter ages ago and made it clear that it wasn't an automated message. I linked them to Spark and pretty much everyone engaged with me. However, getting reviews thereafter was impossible. All I use Twitter for these days is linking articles by me, Retweeting stuff by you lot and mouthing off about Iain Duncan Smith being a cunt. And that's it.
I actually ran an experiment a while ago and I've come to the conclusion that most people on Twitter aren't looking for books to read which is why I wrote the following Twitter novel and Tweeted it out there:
Logged in, no notifications, deleted account.
The only people who Retweeted it were friends on Goodreads so I applied the scientific method and concluded that people don't read books on Twitter which, as we can see, can be backed up with irrefutable evidence. I'm presently producing a pie chart for you all which will further prove that every single user on Twitter is borderline illiterate and that the only book they own are presently being used to balance skins, tobacco and bags of weed on.
So after nearly a year of trying to figure out what works, I've come to the conclusion that Goodreads does - or did. Now I'm totally unsure of what I'm going to do from here. I suppose I could always add them first and then message them. At this rate I may just give up on social media, buy a megaphone and walk round my town centre, yelling at people to buy Spark and The Rebel's Sketchbook.
Rupert wrote: "The only other way to achieve this is by wiping your arse on some paper sheets, stapling them together, calling your creation 'Total Fucking Shit' and then putting it out there for sale."That would certainly do it! If only because it's blatant plagiarism of The Chapman Brothers.
And I think at the very least, the playing field is levelled. Some have had success with an imgur post, but they can be fickle when it comes to free stuff. Lixian (are you friends with her?) and her small indie 'zine troupe will surely help. Bex (Rebecca) is quickly becoming a fount of indie knowledge herself.
Personally, I'm practicing crossing my toes.
I am friends with Lixian on here. I remember reading one of her publications with you in a while ago.I've been talking to Bex about possible methods of getting your stuff read. I think it's a 'try anything and everything' situation and see what happens. However, after a year of being in the indie game I'm convinced Goodreads is where it's at and other platforms can be used effectively once you get the ball rolling.
For sure Goodreads is a great resource. The people that contact you for a review copy will review it the most efficiently and effusively. And should you collect a wide enough group of friends, it will become an electronic word of mouth, which is the most powerful form of marketing anyways :) This new restriction seems like some wheat will be lost in the chaff. But good writing conquers all!!
Hopefully you're right about that. It still feels like an anti-author barrier to me, but time will tell...
I have still to be in the correct situation to promote spark....ie near a sign saying "park" and having a black marker pen on me.
Jason wrote: "I have still to be in the correct situation to promote spark....ie near a sign saying "park" and having a black marker pen on me."Amateur! You mean you weren't even looking for parkour classes, parkas, or tagging larks with "(struck-through letter 'l') + sp" ?? Not to mention all the Rupert the Bear comics I desecrated...
Sorry I am a horrid reviewer and deserved to be punished with papercuts from signed copies of all your books
Jason wrote: "Sorry I am a horrid reviewer and deserved to be punished with papercuts from signed copies of all your books"Lawl!!
N.B. folks, the facts in the Richard Brittain case are in dispute, according to some sources.
It does sound a bit mad, but I'll refrain from judgment until there's a court hearing. Best way with these matters. People love getting swept along with this sort of thing.
Meanwhile for those flummoxed as to how to get reviews, see my suggestions above but also head on over to the Goodreads Review Group https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...
I've just joined. I take it it's been useful in your experience, Mike?
Yes, very, although at the moment I'm mainly involved as a mod rather than an author. I may go in again with Dog!.There are general rounds for any type of book (the next will probably be round 75, which will be announced shortly), 18+ rounds (mainly for stuff that is explicitly adult, but also books with "difficult" material), and - a new innovation - novella rounds for books under 50,000 words.
Reviews are meant to be honest, and they are - they can be as harsh as stranger reviews. But that does mean the group has credibility.
I don't know about you lot, but when I decided to put Spark out there I never for one minute thought that a year later I'd be chasing reviews like a madman with a pitchfork.
Rupert wrote: "I don't know about you lot, but when I decided to put Spark out there I never for one minute thought that a year later I'd be chasing reviews like a madman with a pitchfork."Haha. The funny thing is I expected all this madness. My pitchfork seems to be me making a polite cough behind the world's back as it is turned in the other direction. Makes me more determined though, damn world! (Shakes fist at sky, dramatically)
I don't like doing it. At the moment, I want to concentrate on writing rather than chasing reviews, but I'll have to go back to it soon. Without fresh reviews there's often nothing to post or tweet.
Mike wrote: "I don't like doing it. At the moment, I want to concentrate on writing rather than chasing reviews, but I'll have to go back to it soon. Without fresh reviews there's often nothing to post or tweet."Being intensely private by nature pursuing attention of any kind makes me extremely uncomfortable and is counter to every instinct I have. My strategy is to set aside a designated timeframe and put all my efforts into it, before scurrying back into retreat to recover and just keep up maintenance for the promotional efforts I've already set in motion. It's nice to get my book out there and I want to do my best for it but we can't do everything and I'd like to get back to writing ASAP :)
We can't do everything, but it seems we have to try. When I add marketing to the time I spend formatting, working on covers (or chasing a designer), registering ISBNs, etc., etc, I feel like I spend less time writing than I do on production and marketing. And I used to work in publishing and have some idea of what to do, and how to use the software; others have to learn from the wheels up.I think this will change. There are already companies and individuals around who will "take care" of everything for you, at a price. With time it'll get easier and cheaper to get this stuff done for you. But I think marketing will always be especially difficult.
I have been contacted by a few authors on here offering me a free copy of their book (which I love to receive hint hint). This week I even received a free gift via amazon from an awesome author as I had read and reviewed his other books. Real nice surprise that is.
May there needs to be an option on your account to tick whether you want to receive love letters from Rupert, I all authors. hehe